On 26 Jun 2014, at 16:38, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[email protected]> wrote:
> I know you, and some others, have that opinion and that is OK. > I also think that it would be nice to have (better git integration). > > But we essentially have it today, although a bit cumbersome, awkward (cfr > https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo-core). Some of us store all their code > in git all the time. > > My opinion is that it is not per se the most important thing. We have to > focus on the aspects where we are better, not try being more the same as > everybody else. > > We need modularisation, better tools, new ways of working with live objects, > new interactive representations, mouldable tools, remote image tools, > automatic cloud deploys, magic stuff, .. yes… and better git integration is part of “better tools”. and IMO, with the “plus” that it can boost the other areas. Esteban > > On 26 Jun 2014, at 20:52, Esteban Lorenzano <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> On 26 Jun 2014, at 14:56, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> On 26 Jun 2014, at 19:07, Dale Henrichs <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I think that it is possible to most if not all of the git work support >>>> into the Smalltalk development environment ... I am doing that for >>>> GemStone with tODE[6] and I do find myself going to the go to the command >>>> line much less frequently ... but in tODE I have built a git merge tool >>>> and a git diff tool ... you can get the git history of a method from the >>>> browser, etc. >>>> >>>> Without a relatively high degree of tool integration it can be clunky to >>>> use git ... I am very willing to share what I've done/learned in tODE with >>>> Pharo tool builders and of course I think Thierry Goubier has actually >>>> been ahead of me in several different areas ... >>> >>> That is my analysis: it works today, 'perfectly', but there is not enough >>> tools support to make it as easy as Monticello as a whole is today. >>> >>> If these tools exist, or we can build them quickly based Dale's code, that >>> would be cool (I guess its all OSProcess underneath, which I find so/so, a >>> direct integration is better) that would be good. >>> >>> Would having this change our world fundamentally ? No, IMHO >>> Is it worth the effort, is the ROI there ? I don't think so >> >> I disagree here. I think moving our development to git will change deeply >> (for good) our community processes and then I think it totally worths the >> effort. >> Of course, important part of the advantages came from the tools around git >> (like github) more than git itself, but all is one and the same :) >> A couple of examples of what I think will improve our work: >> - pull requests instead SLICES >> - submodules (with different people taking care of them) >> - traceability: you can map an issue with a pull requests directly making it >> a lot better to query >> >> Then there is other kind of advantages like: >> - better entry-point for newbies to the community (they all expect something >> like git this days) >> - better visibility >> - confidence. This is subjective but important: companies feel more >> confident with something like git than a specific tool to keep their >> sources. >> - we can stop maintaining things like smalltalkhub and important parts of >> monticello itself and concentrate our efforts in other, more interesting >> areas >> >> … and there are more. >> >> In conclusion, I think expending time in git integration is one of the best >> ways to contribute to the develop of Pharo nowadays. >> >> Esteban >> >>> >>> Anyway, it is a delicate subject as it also touches on the representation >>> of the file format. > >
