You're not too far behind the curve. Git was just simmering on the community's burner until early last year when Github hit the scene and turned up the gas. On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 11:04 PM, Nicholas Van Weerdenburg < [email protected]> wrote:
> Thanks- this is exactly what I was trying to understand. The practices and > philosophies of the development team and community and a better > understanding of the Git-way. > > Your response is much appreciated. > > Dammit- I just finished moving to Subversion, took a few years off from > development, and then BAM, all this newfangled stuff. It's making me feel > old. > > Thanks, > Nick > > > On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 9:29 AM, Jonathon Brenner <[email protected]>wrote: > >> >> Please step into my wayback machine... >> >> In the old days (when we had to walk 5 miles uphill in snow without >> shows to get to school), meaning before test driven development and >> github, a project was typically stored in one central repository. Edge >> development was kept in trunk and tags were used to denote stable >> releases. Stable releases were packaged as zip archives for delivery. >> >> Now hop back into this badass time machine (it's got spinners! they >> just keep spinning! even when it's stopped!) and let's fast-forward a >> bit... >> >> Rubyists are partial to the whole git/github thing and we have much >> love for TDD/BDD. Git decentralized ruby development to some extent, >> in that development workflows have changed to accommodate the fork, >> update, pull/push pattern. Branching is still done all the time on >> local repositories. They're used for stories/features. The reason why >> you don't often see them in github repositories is because they are >> typically merged back into master before it's pushed to github. >> >> Tags can be used for stable releases, but TDD muddied the water a >> little bit. Now, with TDD, the master branch is essentially production >> quality. Good testing ensures that what we wrote won't break shit. >> That's why the zip that you see on lovdbyless.com is just an archive >> of a revision. If we were a professional development shop or were just >> less lazy, we'd use a formal development roadmap. Features and >> releases would be planned. Release candidates would be thoroughly >> click-tested and releases would be tagged. The zip on our website >> would refer to github's "download" link for the tag that refers to the >> stable release. >> >> Ok, now let's go back to the present... Let's apply what we've >> learned. Pop quiz time! >> >> We, the LovdByLess team, are: >> A. Too lazy to follow a proper development path. >> B. Too arrogant to believe that our tests leave us with anything less >> than a production quality master. >> C. Indifferent because we have other stuff going on. >> D. All of the above. >> >> The answer is E: Who gives a shit? We're putting development time into >> a project that would otherwise not exist. If something better comes >> out, awesome. If someone forks the project and it catches on, awesome. >> I guess that's essentially "C", but whatever. I'm late for work. >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 8:34 AM, Jason Keenan <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > Hi Nick, >> > Don't quote me on this as I'm pretty new to git too, but my >> understanding of >> > git is that, especially in the case of open source projects, the reason >> that >> > there is not much in the way of branching or tagging is that git is a >> true >> > 'distributed model'. Every fork is a legitimate 'release'. Some may be >> the >> > same, some may be different. At the end of the day the community decides >> > which is the best version to follow depending on community need and the >> > speed of development of the fork. If you did a bit of development that >> Steve >> > decided he didn't want to pull, say if it clashed with his personal >> > philosophies or directions for lovd, but the community likes your >> direction, >> > then your fork would be the one that the community would clone from. >> Because >> > there is no true owner of a 'central' repository, in lots of cases it >> > doesn't make sense to have tags or branches, especially when a project >> isn't >> > isn't completely finished. Linus evangelizes git in a video that's I >> think >> > is linked to on the main git site. I think it's a talk at google. While >> it's >> > not a tutorial it sort of explains what the philosophy is. That's my >> take >> > anyway. >> > Jason :) >> > On 20/02/2009, at 11:38 AM, Nicholas Van Weerdenburg wrote: >> > >> > Hi Steven, >> > >> > I'm sure of my own preferences, but was curious about specific community >> > practices. >> > >> > For Git, things like branching, release, and maintenance strategies. If >> I >> > were to deploy the zip file for a customer, what would there upgrade >> path >> > be? If from Git, are there plans for release and maintenance branches, >> etc. >> > >> > I'm about to start a rails project, and want to define my configuration >> > management strategy. I'm new to Git having been a svn user, and am >> finding a >> > lot of Git projects to run without much branching/tagging, especially >> when >> > it comes to maintenance. I'm still unsure why. >> > >> > Most importantly, I want to leave my clients with a clear understanding >> of >> > their platform so that they can move forward on future >> > maintenance/upgrades/changes without me being involved if I've happened >> to >> > be unavailable. >> > >> > Overall, I'm fairly sophisticated when it comes to configuration >> management, >> > and one things I'm fond of is to align with in-place practices where >> > appropriate. >> > >> > Am I making any sense? >> > >> > Further along these lines, and I apologize if I may have asked similar >> > questions a couple of months ago (I've had a break since I started my >> > project), what is the envisioned community model regarding LovdByLess. I >> > don't see many entreaties for contribution,and the sense I get is that >> it's >> > viewed somewhat as an almost finished product (which would seem to be >> > keeping with the less philosophy). >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Nick >> > >> > On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 12:43 AM, Steven Bristol < >> [email protected]> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 11:02 PM, Nicholas Van Weerdenburg >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > The website doesn't really make much reference to using GitHub versus >> >> > downloading the zip. >> >> > >> >> > What are most people using? And even if a non-developer, doesn't it >> make >> >> > sense to use GitHub to allow patching, etc with future versions? >> >> > >> >> > And reference for using GitHub with LovdByLess? >> >> > >> >> > Thanks, >> >> > Nick >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> I would say that if you are not sure, then it doesn't really matter. >> >> >> >> cheers, >> >> steven bristol >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Nicholas Van Weerdenburg >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > >> > >> >> >> > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lovd by Less" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lovdbyless?hl=en Who loves ya baby? -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
