Wedge
Public area => The Pub => Off-topic => Topic started by: Dragooon on January 7th, 2011, 06:40 PM
-
So...I just switched my project to git and so far its been nice(Purchased a 12$ plan over github.com). I added TOX-G's git repository as a submodule to my repository and it actually works well! Branching is surely a lot more sensible than SVN, that and its DCVS is nice for teams. It surely is better than SVN in every way, I'm using Tower for Mac as a client.
-
Pfft, I pay $6/month with RepositoryHosting and have the choice of SVN, Git or Mercurial :P
-
Pffftttttttttttt..........Wtf....:p
Does it contain browser for public viewing?
-
Yes. Also contains a full instance of Trac which means ticket tracker, wiki, roadmap and some other stuff.
-
Is it sexier than github?
-
I don't really use github, I have to admit I don't overly like Git, but maybe that's because I haven't used it much.
Github is probably sexier than RepositoryHosting, but RH is convenient and flexible since you can pick a repo for each project you have on there.
-
In github you can have unlimited public repositories for free, but need to pay for private. And if RH is not sexier than github, than I'm fine with it :P.
-
RH you pay one price, repos are public or private, your choice, but I think there's a 10GB limit in total. I'm years away from ever hitting that though :P
-
If only I could get a demo of its public browser.
-
http://trac.edgewall.org/browser basically; it's just a lightly themed variant.
-
Thanks, I may switch :D
-
Is it sexier than github?
-
YOU LIE!
Wedge is DAYMN sexy.
-
Ahahaha! :lol:
-
Is it sexier than github?
On a more serious note, I think git can be more beneficial for something like Wedge, it is clearly a lot more organized than SVN and branching/tagging is a lot more sensible/easier now.
-
I've long thought that Git and Mercurial seem like they should work better when there's a bigger team. With just two contributors it seems a little unnecessary.
-
I can see it being beneficial when there's a proper release cycle, along with 2 people who have some radically different ideas because then branching makes sense. Plus you guys do seek to expand, don't you?
-
Yeah, I suppose there is that way actually, that you branch, add a new feature then merge it back in.
I don't just want to up and move the repo to Mercurial or Git (yeah, I find myself leaning to Mercurial but for no reason other than it has a cool name, there's nothing in it from my perspective) without a good reason since transitions are not good and do have a tendency to drop meta data at times.
-
I am not forcing anyone, just a personal advice. And the transition from SVN to Git was flawless for me, github has a simple enter your SVN repository URL type thingy that imports the repository within 20 minutes.
-
Did it keep the entire revision history?
-
Did it keep the entire revision history?
-
What I might do is experiment with importing the Wedge repo into either a Git or Mercurial container on RepositoryHosting (you can't just magically convert one to the other, but you can export and import and RH supports all three) just to get a feel for it.
-
Re: Audrey Hepburn... My, you weren't even born when she passed away. And I was already old enough to mourn her like a lost first love. :(
I can see it being beneficial when there's a proper release cycle, along with 2 people who have some radically different ideas because then branching makes sense. Plus you guys do seek to expand, don't you?
Yeah Pete, why not try. But I'm quite used to SVN by now and don't really see a point to use anything else. As for code conflicts, it's usually due to me not correctly updating my copy before I commit it.
-
One feature I loved about Github was that you can actually comment on a commit's change's line and initiate a full fledged discussion on it.
-
Sounds like the threads here - New Revs, New Revs - Comments
-
;)