Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

Hi, I did some experiments both with hg and git, and collecting responses. IMHO there is no real technical point to prefer one of DVCS'es. * Tim Moore told us gitorious have push too. * msysgit is a little bit better integrated in Windows -- for instance simpler file name mapping. * with tortoi

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

So what would the "source tree" look like to you as a developer and pilot eg hanger/boeing/** Pablo Rogina wrote: > Pete Morgan wrote: > > > I do like the way qt uses it with merge requests. a lot of them to do > > with documentation corrections, as well as minor touches to code. > > I was foll

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

Pete Morgan wrote: > I do like the way qt uses it with merge requests. a lot of them to do > with documentation corrections, as well as minor touches to code. I was following this thread since I'm interested about opinions and thoughts about version control systems, from a software engineering pe

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

Tim wrote > -Original Message- > From: Tim Moore [mailto:timo...@redhat.com] > Sent: 29 September 2009 09:26 > To: FlightGear developers discussions > Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems > > On 09/29/2009 08:54 AM, Stefan Seifert wrot

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

Tim Moore wrote: > The gitorious repos are being run in the pull style right now. No > one has asked for commit rights to it, and the only official source of patches > is CVS... but as I have said elsewhere, these repos are not a direct mirror of > CVS. I've been maintaining a "master" branch which

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

On 09/29/2009 08:54 AM, Stefan Seifert wrote: > On Tuesday, 29. September 2009, Olaf Flebbe wrote: > >> Let me talk from the Windows perspective: >> >> git seems to work best with msysgit. Entrance barrier: You need to know >> UNIX shell. (After trying out I would recommend the msysgit rather the

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

On Tuesday, 29. September 2009, Olaf Flebbe wrote: > Let me talk from the Windows perspective: > > git seems to work best with msysgit. Entrance barrier: You need to know > UNIX shell. (After trying out I would recommend the msysgit rather the > cygwin). Documentation of msysgit is almost non exis

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

James A. Treacy schrieb: > On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 07:25:33PM -0600, Ron Jensen wrote: >> My own, personal opinion is SVN is worse than CVS. I see no advantage >> to moving there first. > > Could you elaborate on this? This discussion needs more facts so that > a rational decision can be reached.

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 07:25:33PM -0600, Ron Jensen wrote: > My own, personal opinion is SVN is worse than CVS. I see no advantage > to moving there first. Could you elaborate on this? This discussion needs more facts so that a rational decision can be reached. -- James Treacy tre...@debian.or

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

On Mon, 2009-09-28 at 23:58 +0100, Pete Morgan wrote: > As an observer.. > > This is a long thread with no conclusions, but maybe one. > > The one firm conclusion is to get off CVS at least. > > So i dont see why it can't be first be moved to svn which is tried and > tested, supported on windo

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

As an observer.. This is a long thread with no conclusions, but maybe one. The one firm conclusion is to get off CVS at least. So i dont see why it can't be first be moved to svn which is tried and tested, supported on windows as the first step. pete ---

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

On 09/26/2009 10:50 PM, Olaf Flebbe wrote: > Hi, > > I do not have write permissions to any of the hg or git reprositories... > > So I can only check repositories out, which works flawless with git and > hg, no surprise. > I see that you've cloned the gitorious repo; if you still need write acc

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

On 09/26/2009 10:50 PM, Olaf Flebbe wrote: > Hi, > > I do not have write permissions to any of the hg or git reprositories... > > So I can only check repositories out, which works flawless with git and > hg, no surprise. > I see that you've cloned the gitorious repo; if you still need write acc

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

On 09/24/2009 10:56 PM, Olaf Flebbe wrote: > > 2) From the homepage: > "So you do not want to help? Then there is nothing to see here, please > move along." this is not friendly for the casual user of some kind of > middleware when I have other options. This is in the section "How Not to Parti

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 1:50 PM, Olaf Flebbe wrote: > I do not have write permissions to any of the hg or git reprositories... Yeah. I don't think there is a way I can find out everybody's google accounts from their email traffic. To try to speed this up, I've put up a quick web form: https://s

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

On Saturday 26 September 2009 21:50:30 Olaf Flebbe wrote: > * The real thing would be FlightGear "data"! I'm sure I'm not the only person who has been happily using the mapserver git repo for FG data for quite some time now (on Linux)... Cheers, AJ

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

Hi, I do not have write permissions to any of the hg or git reprositories... So I can only check repositories out, which works flawless with git and hg, no surprise. BUT: * Both the hg https://possible-little-test.googlecode.com/hg and the gitorious repositories have corrupted the VC90 Project

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 10:05 PM, Alex Perry wrote: > On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 9:46 PM, Tom P wrote: >> Hi >> >> I've tried to push a Mercurial test repository (FlightGear converted from >> CVS) to code.google.com for a few hours, without success. >> It aborts regularly with the following message:

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 9:46 PM, Tom P wrote: > Hi > > I've tried to push a Mercurial test repository (FlightGear converted from > CVS) to code.google.com for a few hours, without success. > It aborts regularly with the following message: > searching for changes > abort: error: Connection timed ou

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

Hi I've tried to push a Mercurial test repository (FlightGear converted from CVS) to code.google.com for a few hours, without success. It aborts regularly with the following message: searching for changes abort: error: Connection timed out After digging a bit, it looks like I stumbled on a known

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

Olaf Flebbe wrote: > Windows Implementations: > > git can be tedious to use on Windows: I had big problems working on a > project mixing up git repositories on linux pushed and pulled by a > windows git via samba. git at some point complained about non existing > differences: Somehow line endi

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

Hi Olaf You are very familiar with Mercurial, could you help set up a repository converted from FlightGear's CVS ? I think our only hope of moving forward with this issue is to compare git and mercurial in real-world scenarios. The git repositories at gitorious.organd mapserver.flightgear.org hav

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

Hi Olaf, Olaf Flebbe wrote: > [...] this is not friendly for the casual user of some kind of > middleware when I have other options. Well, they're providing installer packages and people are using it in real-world development for a while already. Therefore I was under the assumption that it's p

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

Hi Martim, > People to whom I've talked happily recommended this one: > > http://code.google.com/p/msysgit/ > > and I'd be happy to learn about your dislike. 1) From the Installation Manual: http://code.google.com/p/msysgit/wiki/InstallMSysGit ... Note: Git for Windows is not as stable

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

Hi Olaf, Olaf Flebbe wrote: > [...] I had no chance to look deeper into details. The stable git > command on Windows needs cygwin, which is not a minimal invasive > installation. (I wouldn't recommend the msys/mingw installation at this > point.) People to whom I've talked happily recommended

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

Hi, Sorry for my late contribution to this topic: I am late catching up with my mails since my last holidays. Let me tell you from my personal experiences some weeks ago with git and hg an linux and Windows. Windows Implementations: git can be tedious to use on Windows: I had big problems wor

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 12:56 PM, Stuart Buchanan wrote: > Tim Moore wrote: >> On 09/02/2009 09:19 PM, Curtis Olson wrote: >> > >> > Is this an argument to stay with CVS for the data portion of the project? >> > >> > This is a good point to bring up though in advance.  The default project >> > quo

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

Tim Moore wrote: > On 09/02/2009 09:19 PM, Curtis Olson wrote: > > > > Is this an argument to stay with CVS for the data portion of the project? > > > > This is a good point to bring up though in advance. The default project > > quota at code.google.com (is there a shorter > > abbreviation?) is

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

On 09/03/2009 06:07 PM, Curtis Olson wrote: > On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 4:10 AM, Tim Moore > wrote: > > It would be a pity to move from CVS and end up with SVN, even > temporarily. > First, let's be clear that "some other system" means Git. Several of us >

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

Curtis Olson wrote: > [...] I really appreciate those that have responded > professionally. This really helps to advance this discussion in a positive > direction. Now, if everyone involved also acts "professionally", I'm sure we're going to see a satisfying solution pretty soon. Cheers,

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

Hi Curt et al., Well, I guess that most has been said already, but let me weight in with just a few additional points. I also believe that it is time to move the repositories over to a higher capacity and professionally maintained infra structure. My experiences with google code are generally

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

Hi Anders Finally I found the time for a benchmark, and it turns out that a complete clone of 'data', using a 1.5Mb/s link, takes more than 3 hours. I think that if we switch to git, and if we expect the size of 'data' to keep growing at a brisk pace (addition of great new aircrafts, fancy new mo

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

Think this page on creating a "super" project and having "submodules" is a good read. http://git.or.cz/gitwiki/GitSubmoduleTutorial ;-) Mathias Fröhlich wrote: > Hi, > > I also believe that we should move away from CVS. > > svn would have the benefit that it is very easy to use if you know cvs.

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

Hi, I also believe that we should move away from CVS. svn would have the benefit that it is very easy to use if you know cvs. Distributes systems have their huge benefits. If that DVCS is git or hg is more or less a matter of taste IMO. The downside is that distributes systems are more comple

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

On Thu, 3 Sep 2009, Tom P wrote: > Hi Anders > > How long does it take you to do a shallow clone from mapserver ? > > While I've checked-out data via CVS various times in the past (and it takes > a couple of hours), I haven't been able to clone the 1.6GB fgdata > repository, I interrupted after a

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

Hi Anders How long does it take you to do a shallow clone from mapserver ? While I've checked-out data via CVS various times in the past (and it takes a couple of hours), I haven't been able to clone the 1.6GB fgdata repository, I interrupted after a few hours. I'm on an 1.5 Mbps ADSL link, and

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 7:09 PM, Anders Gidenstam wrote: > > > An update on the shallow clone: > git keeps a compressed pack of the data in addition to the working copy. > When cloning the current fgdata git repository from the map server with > depth 1 this overhead adds up to about 1 GB. More ove

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

On Thu, 3 Sep 2009, Anders Gidenstam wrote: > A user who isn't interested in the history can also make a shallow clone > with git which I would expect to be only very slightly larger than the > working copy itself, enabling the user to save disk space by > sacrificing functionality he/she isn't in

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

On Thu, 3 Sep 2009, Tim Moore wrote: > With git, the repo size is 1.7Gb, which each user would checks out as > well as the 2Gb working copy. However, this gives you access to the entire > project history, for which SVN still needs access to the central server. A user who isn't interested in the h

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

Hi there, First of all, I want to thank Curt for starting this discussion. I'm very glad to hear that you are willing to improve the current situation. Aside from the religious aspect of choosing a version control software (or whatever you name it), I want to say what should or can be improve

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

> Am new to flightgear, but read this thread, and for a tuppence worth (ducks) > > have you looked at launchpad.net ? > > thats got scm, bus tracker, teams, etc, etc > > What is launchpad? https://launchpad.net/+tour/index > > and that uses Bazaar scm > > regards > Pete > Fortunately, there are a

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

Am new to flightgear, but read this thread, and for a tuppence worth (ducks) have you looked at launchpad.net ? thats got scm, bus tracker, teams, etc, etc What is launchpad? https://launchpad.net/+tour/index and that uses Bazaar scm regards Pete Curtis Olson wrote: > On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 4

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 4:10 AM, Tim Moore wrote: > It is important to remember that, unlike a personal religious choice like > emacs vs. vi, the outcome of this religious debate will affect many > people's > daily interaction with Flightgear. In this way I suppose the debate is more > like a reli

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

On 3 Sep 2009, at 10:10, Tim Moore wrote: > Tim Rather than add to the debate, I'll just say that I agree 100% with everything Tim just said, about SVN, CVS, Hg, ease of branching / merging and so on. (and especially about SourceForge being a non-starter!) James ---

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

On 09/02/2009 09:19 PM, Curtis Olson wrote: > On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 2:02 PM, Tom P > wrote: > > Hi Curt > > My only concern with SVN is that it stores every file twice in the > local file system, so it's not ideal for the 'data' portion of > FlightGear.

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

On 09/02/2009 05:55 PM, Curtis Olson wrote: > Source code control systems are close to religious topics for many > people so I want to avoid potential panic here. I understand that due > to the diversity of opinions within our developer community, it will be > impossible to reach any kind of conse

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

On Wednesday 02 September 2009 17:55:07 Curtis Olson wrote: > In addition, I am self hosting our master CVS repository which means that > if my machine breaks, I personally am on the hook to drop everything else > and do whatever it takes (ranging from hardware, to OS, to security, to > whateve

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

AJ MacLeod wrote: > With the data tree, we frequently have several people working on the same > area > (aircraft models, in particular) - not only that, but many of the people > working on aircraft models have historically not had any kind of commit > access to the main repository. The line b

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Tom P wrote: > My only concern with SVN is that it stores every file twice in the local > file system, so it's not ideal for the 'data' portion of FlightGear. For > example, right now a complete checkout of Aircraft is ~ 2 GB, and it would > double overnight. If we

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

Hi Tom, Tom P wrote: > But let's say that the project switched completely to GIT, would there > be a way to support streaming scenery ('terrasync') to the user without > him/her needing to clone the entire fgdata repository ? Terrascenery is a totally independent affair and therefore not affec

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

Hi AJ, hi Martin I see the advantages of GIT, no need to be convinced of that. And I've had a look at the GIT projects on mapserver, very nice, and it's already split into source and data!!! But let's say that the project switched completely to GIT, would there be a way to support streaming s

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 12:17 AM, AJ MacLeod wrote: > > In case it wasn't clear by now... I think we should be using git for both > source and data - as previously mentioned, many (if not most) FG developers > are already using it (though missing many benefits that would arise from the > main repo b

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

Hi, >In case it wasn't clear by now... I think we should be using git for both >source and data - as previously mentioned, many (if not most) FG developers >are already using it (though missing many benefits that would arise from the >main repo being git). >Cheers, >AJ I can only agree to A

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

Tom P wrote: > Well, it's more an argument in favor of splitting the data and source > code, like it's already the case for the Scenery > http://code.google.com/p/terrascenery/ Terrascenery is a somewhat special case in that it has almost just one single, automated feed, it is destined to never

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

On Wednesday 02 September 2009 22:44:56 Tom P wrote: > Yes, I agree, a distributed system is overkill for the data portion. I would disagree... > 1) data is handled well by a lightweight client-server model (either CVS > or SVN) that: > - allows users and developers to synchronize their local d

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

Curtis Olson wrote: On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 2:02 PM, Tom P > wrote: Hi Curt My only concern with SVN is that it stores every file twice in the local file system, so it's not ideal for the 'data' portion of FlightGear. For example, right now a complete c

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 4:19 PM, Curtis Olson wrote: > On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 2:02 PM, Tom P wrote: > >> Hi Curt >> >> My only concern with SVN is that it stores every file twice in the local >> file system, so it's not ideal for the 'data' portion of FlightGear. For >> example, right now a comp

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

Curtis Olson wrote: > Is this an argument to stay with CVS for the data portion of the project? I've been loosely monitoring the 'quality' of CVS checkouts for some time now and to my experience the number of silent transmission errors is most significant with the data repository. Therefore I don

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 4:02 PM, Tom P wrote: > Hi Curt > > My only concern with SVN is that it stores every file twice in the local > file system, so it's not ideal for the 'data' portion of FlightGear. For > example, right now a complete checkout of Aircraft is ~ 2 GB, and it would > double ove

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 2:02 PM, Tom P wrote: > Hi Curt > > My only concern with SVN is that it stores every file twice in the local > file system, so it's not ideal for the 'data' portion of FlightGear. For > example, right now a complete checkout of Aircraft is ~ 2 GB, and it would > double ove

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

Hi Curt My only concern with SVN is that it stores every file twice in the local file system, so it's not ideal for the 'data' portion of FlightGear. For example, right now a complete checkout of Aircraft is ~ 2 GB, and it would double overnight. I know, disk space is cheap in these days, bu

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Source code control systems

Curtis Olson wrote: > What I propose is that we migrate our self hosted CVS repository to > code.google.com and in the process convert to SVN. > > 1. This gives us "professional" management of the servers, regular > professional backups, and an automatec access control system for adding new > dev