« WTF
git hiccups

Nao

  • Dadman with a boy
  • Posts: 16,077
Re: git hiccups
« Reply #15, on October 22nd, 2013, 10:46 AM »
Quote from live627 on October 22nd, 2013, 10:32 AM
I'll get a good Git client installed tomorrow, and accept the invite. I have almost no free time nowadays, might get even busier (yikes!) over the holidays.
Well, I'm not asking for anyone to contribute anything; I'm just saying, Wedge has suddenly become easier to contribute to (and be properly credited in the changelog), if you want to.

PS: How come you're on github and not using a git client..? Are you using GitHub for Windows..?

(I'm personally happy with TortoiseGit. Used to hate it, but I reconsidered when I realized that TortoiseHg was too different from what I was accustomed to, in TortoiseSVN.)

TE

  • Posts: 286
Re: git hiccups
« Reply #16, on October 22nd, 2013, 10:57 AM »
Quote from live627 on October 22nd, 2013, 10:32 AM
I sent in that very patch in 2010. That is my only contribution worth porting to SMF.
Thank you for clarification.. Knowing that earlier could have avoided some misunderstandings..

I can recommend Netbeans / gitbash combination.

You can do almost all things via GUI in Netbeans except the git pull -- rebase (maybe it's possible but I haven't figured how to do it).
Thorsten "TE" Eurich - Former SMF Developer & Converters Guru

Nao

  • Dadman with a boy
  • Posts: 16,077
Re: git hiccups
« Reply #17, on October 22nd, 2013, 11:03 AM »
Quote from TE on October 20th, 2013, 11:01 AM
Last time I checked Wedge (a year ago or so) it wasn't true OOP but using singletons all over the place..
Skeletons are a truly OOP class. That's the only one I ever wrote to be OOP, but guess what, it's also the only one that could benefit from being OOP.
Do you have any other idea what could really benefit from OOP..?!
Quote
Elk is using OOP where it makes sense, yes. We have a coding guideline and we simply follow our own standards:
But SMF is already MVC to begin with...
Quote
The point of following standards is to make it less complicated for developers and easier extendable. And last but not least to use other common standards such as unit-testing and build-testing (travis ci).
I don't know much about these, so I'll pass.
Quote
Nao, I would probably have contributed my code and energy to Wedge but I wasn't allowed to do so..  Sadly you (and Pete) never gave me write access to the main repo, thus I moved on at some point.. Sorry.
We were supposed to release much earlier, which is why we always postponed giving more writing rights to anyone in the team. Really, we simply refused write access to *anyone*, not just you... And now that Pete is gone, I'm working on that. Beginning with the conversion to Git, and support for pull requests (since yesterday.) So, if you want access, there's a topic for that... ;)
I'm afraid I don't remember you ever asking for commit access to the main repo, though...! I don't remember you providing any patches either. Only Shitiz and John did. You wrote the importer, and then you got feverish when one day I confirmed that we were going to go with the original SMF license and were considering a paid version, and you didn't want anything to do with that, and you left. Then you saw that we didn't implement that, and you came back later, and then one day you left again, for no apparent reason.

It just stuck with me that you were more interested in helping Elk than Wedge, is all.
Quote
And please: I'm not up for a battle comparing Elk, Wedge and SMF... We all have wasted more than enough time & energy to complain about SMF, their NPO structure and such stuff. At least I don't have the time nor the passion to start such type of "battle" once again. Elk and Wedge are simply following completely different approaches ..
I don't know, how different are they exactly...?
It's not like they're incompatible, either...
Except for Wedge blatantly breaking mod compatibility, of course! :P
(And Pete never ever documenting any of his codebase changes... :whistle:)

Re: git hiccups
« Reply #18, on October 22nd, 2013, 11:27 AM »
For Git client: SourceTree is supposed to be pretty easy to use.

Nao

  • Dadman with a boy
  • Posts: 16,077
Re: git hiccups
« Reply #19, on October 22nd, 2013, 01:46 PM »
Yeah... Well, I don't know about the general opinion, but I didn't like SourceTree when it was released, and I uninstalled it less than a day after trying it out. Was some time ago, dunno if it has improved in the meantime. Just like SmartGit -- apparently, recently they renamed it to 'SmartGitHg' (well, what a wonderful rename... :lol:), maybe it's improved, but for what I know, I liked TortoiseGit best when I tested them all.

forumsearch0r

  • Posts: 118
Re: git hiccups
« Reply #20, on October 22nd, 2013, 02:02 PM »
I'd use git on the shell ... :D

... there is a public Wedge repo?

Nao

  • Dadman with a boy
  • Posts: 16,077
Re: git hiccups
« Reply #21, on October 22nd, 2013, 02:14 PM »
Nope, it's still a private repo!
Refer to my roadmap to determine when it'll be made public, I guess.

forumsearch0r

  • Posts: 118
Re: git hiccups
« Reply #22, on October 22nd, 2013, 02:15 PM »
Damn. OK. :)

Nao

  • Dadman with a boy
  • Posts: 16,077
Re: git hiccups
« Reply #23, on February 20th, 2014, 01:53 PM »
I was just wondering... Did anyone ever receive spam at their git e-mails, following your use of that particular e-mail address as their commit e-mail on public github repos..?

I've always been very wary of making my e-mail address public (actually, I even have two addresses, in case one of the two ends up being spammed), because my old e-mail address (nao at kyodai dot com) was spammed to death -- about 30K spams per hour at its peak, meaning I eventually had to give up on that e-mail account. I'm aware that Google has better spam management (I'm already getting spam in both my gmail boxes despite NEVER making them public... Sigh, but at least they're mostly in the spam box), but I'm really really not excited about the idea of giving my e-mail address "like that".
My fake e-mail is nao at wedge, implying the org thing for those who can read a website URL, which in turn redirects to my gmail.

GitHub no longer wants to associate fake e-mails with accounts, even though they accepted them up til now.
So, if I associate the 'implied' e-mail address with my git account, the results are:

- I'll have to rewrite history for ALL of my frigging repos (about a dozen, including my Nao ones)... Seriously, that's f*cked up. I spent 4 days last month rewriting my histories to be as clean as possible, squashing newline-fixing commits together to avoid f*cking with the "lines added/lines removed" statistics, etc... I wanted to be as clean as possible, and then 3 weeks later -- GitHub is telling me they changed their mind and want me to do the same again. What next, then..?

- None of the repos I can't control will be able to update my e-mail address, although it doesn't matter as much.

I'd like to know who's currently using a cloned repo of Wedge, or any of its repos.

Pandos

  • Living on the edge of Wedge
  • Posts: 635
Re: git hiccups
« Reply #24, on February 20th, 2014, 01:58 PM »
I do.
It's a 1:1 copy. Even languages and plugins.
# dpkg-reconfigure brain
error: brain is not installed or configured

emanuele

  • Posts: 125
Re: git hiccups
« Reply #25, on February 20th, 2014, 04:02 PM »
Quote from Nao on February 20th, 2014, 01:53 PM
I was just wondering... Did anyone ever receive spam at their git e-mails, following your use of that particular e-mail address as their commit e-mail on public github repos..?
I'm using my email just because it was already considered the "garbage" email (i.e. the email I use for almost anything like mailing list, not trustable websites, etc.), I didn't see any peak on spam, I always have 22/23 new emails in gmail spam folder, so it's kind of stable.
Others have seen spam (I seem to remember SleePy ranting about it).
Dunno.

Nao

  • Dadman with a boy
  • Posts: 16,077
Re: git hiccups
« Reply #26, on February 21st, 2014, 01:07 AM »
So what would you in my place, guys..?
Posted: February 20th, 2014, 09:46 PM

I'm just bumping this because there have been many updated topics, so I'm increasing visibility like the bastard I am. :P

See you tomorrow!
Re: git hiccups
« Reply #27, on February 21st, 2014, 12:30 PM »
Okay, last night GitHub support replied to me, and recognizes that their anti-fake test is a bit too eager, and probably shouldn't be triggered on a fake e-mail such as mine.

They're working on it.

So I'll give it another few days, and hopefully it'll be fixed by then.

If there's one thing I can never take away from GitHub, it's the quality of their tech support. It's free, and yet it never feels like they're sending stock answers, and they're always ready to listen to suggestions. That's amazing. I'd love to be (seen) as caring as they are!

Bunstonious

  • Espada
  • Posts: 204
Re: git hiccups
« Reply #28, on February 21st, 2014, 03:15 PM »
Quote from Nao on February 21st, 2014, 12:30 PM
If there's one thing I can never take away from GitHub, it's the quality of their tech support. It's free, and yet it never feels like they're sending stock answers, and they're always ready to listen to suggestions. That's amazing. I'd love to be (seen) as caring as they are!
You are... Well mostly ;)
Quote from Random Guy
Not putting miles on your Ferrari is like not having sex with your Girlfriend so she'll be more desirable to her next Boyfriend

Nao

  • Dadman with a boy
  • Posts: 16,077
Re: git hiccups
« Reply #29, on February 24th, 2014, 11:26 AM »
Oh, forgot to post about this: the fix was pushed a couple of days ago, and I'm happy to announce I won't be tempted to rewrite any history any time soon... :P

It's a bit tempting to start using their 'dedicated' anti-spam addresses, but OTOH, I like having a non-GitHub specific e-mail for my commits.