A Dijous 26 Abril 2007, Jeff Muizelaar va escriure: > On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 12:58:41PM -0700, Krzysztof Kowalczyk wrote: > > On 4/26/07, Jeff Muizelaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >So what do people, especially Albert, think? Now that 302 is merged > > >(thanks Albert) we have time to do less constructive things like argue > > >about which SCM to use :) > > > > I understand that as a non-contributor my opinion doesn't count as much > > but... > > > > As someone who uses Windows as a main devel OS, I think you're > > underplaying the barrier to entry that git adds for windows developers > > (on top of existing barriers to entry). > > Maybe. I'm probably not the best example, but I've used both cvs > (Tortoise and Cygwin) and git on windows and I much prefer git. > > > Yes, there are work-arounds (install cygwin or even use VMWare and > > share directories between host windows and guest vmware'd linux) and I > > did those. There are (significant in my opinion problems with that). > > I'm curious what the problem were with using cygwin. I can't say I've > had any signficant problems using cygwin. > > > It's significantly more time consuming that downloading and installing > > native Subversion client. It doesn't integrate well with native tools > > (e.g. if I code in Visual Studio, with SVN I could do all svn > > interaction without leaving IDE, with git I would have to switch to > > cygwin shell - not a big problem but very annoying). > > I could list annoyances with using SVN or CVS vs. git too: > - performance (this one is huge) > - lack of something like StGit > - lack of something like 'git log [directory]' > - lack of a decent web interface on freedesktop > > > And finally, I put myself in the "experienced Unix user" category but > > I don't believe that's the case with most Windows developers so don't > > really expect that most people will be thrilled by the prospect of > > learning Unix just so that they can get by in cygwin well enough to > > use git. > > Wouldn't they have to learn Unix well enough to build Poppler as > well? Once they've gotten that far, using git isn't much harder. > > > So on the source control front, I don't see a compelling reason for > > switching from cvs but if the switch happens, I would much prefer svn > > over git. > > Just the concept of having atomic changes to the source tree is as > compelling reason as I think we need. Personally, I don't see a > compelling reason to keep using cvs. > > > In general, I think that open-source projects that want their code to > > be well supported on Windows should ask "how can we make it easy for > > windows developers to contribute" as opposed to "if we do this, will > > it be bad enough for them to not contribute". > > This of course needs to be weighed against the cost that this has on > unix developers. > > > Using windows-friendly scm is one thing. Providing native build > > environment (i.e. Visual Studio project files) would be another. In my > > experience a majority of unix-originated project don't put any effort > > (or even actively work against) attracting Windows developers and > > that, in my opinion, is the reason why they don't get any patches from > > them. > > CVS wasn't a very windows-friendly scm when it was 2 years old either. > It only became friendly because enough windows users needed to use CVS. > Plus, there is work being done to make git easier to use on windows like > the eclipse plugin and the SoC mono port. > > > Cairo isn't a good example either. It's a very active project but it > > actually is often broken on windows and, relatively to overall > > activity, gets very little contributions from windows crows (I believe > > most of developement was done by Mozilla folks, that don't have a > > choice but to make it work on windows well enough for mozilla). > > But I don't think that the lack of contributions from windows people is > because cairo uses git. I could be wrong, but I don't think the number > of windows contributions has gone down significantly from when cairo > used CVS. My point here was just that the cairo people do actually care > about the windows folk. Whereas, afaik, Poppler doesn't even try to be > buildable on windows.
Well, in my opinion me we are not against poppler on windows, just that noone is working on it :-D P.S: As a sidenode, since August last year, my blog received from google 127 people searching for "poppler windows" 8 people searching for "poppler for windows" 8 people searching for "windows poppler" 5 people searching for "poppler on windows" 3 people searching for "poppler+windows" 3 people searching for "pdf poppler windows" 3 people searching for "Poppler windows" 3 people searching for "poppler mingw" 3 people searching for "poppler pdf windows" 3 people searching for "+poppler +windows" 2 people searching for "poppler pdf viewer windows" 2 people searching for "poppler pdf windows" 2 people searching for "compile windows poppler qt4" 1 person searching for "window pdf reader poppler" and to compare only 6 people searching for "poppler" 6 people searching for "poppler-qt4 download" 6 people searching for "poppler qt4" 3 people searching for "poppler vs xpdf" 3 people searching for "poppler-qt4" 2 people searching for "kpdf poppler" 2 people searching for "poppler-0.4.3" 2 people searching for "kpdf poppler patch" 1 person searching for "poppler opengl" <---- WTF? So it seems THERE is a "market" for poppler on windows, we just need someone working on it :D Albert > > -Jeff > _______________________________________________ > poppler mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/poppler _______________________________________________ poppler mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/poppler
