Re: Feature request: Git support
I would love a GIT app as well. Unfortunately I think the nature of GIT is such a vast paradigm shift from SVN, this not something you could just tag into Versions and make it work well It needs to be a standalone app, and given the previous comments about forced open sourced, it looks like we won't be seeing something like this from Sofa/Pico. On Jul 24, 2:19 am, frebro fre...@gmail.com wrote: Would it be possible for Versions to support both Git and Svn repositories? It would be nice to be able to collect all repos in the same app regardless of protocol. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Versions group. To post to this group, send email to versions@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to versions+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/versions?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Feature request: Git support
A good idea in theory, but SCM systems behave differently enough (distributed SCMs such as git, doubly so) that it would be quite a feat to create and use a plugin system that supports all (or even many) different SCM's with an acceptable degree of functionality and polish. I really think that a dedicated app would be the best, but I'm not delusional enough to think I'm always right, and would love to be proven wrong. :-) - Quinn On Aug 22, 2009, at 5:28 AM, Joe Simpson wrote: Why not make for a new version of Versions based on plugins. Then if people want Git support, they can put Git support in (or any other system). That would make me buy it :D On Jul 31, 5:44 pm, unleashed p...@unleashedcreative.com wrote: I understand where the other posters are coming from, but thought I'd chime in as well. I'd have no problem paying full price for a versions git as well. I read the other posts and I realize this might not be worth it for the software developers, but if they are ever on the edge... I don't understand all the differences between git and svn, except that my developer is a huge fan of git, and he's the smartest person I know.Git does seem tidier in a lot of ways. Gitx is pretty bad if you're used to versions, and while I can use terminal to manage git, it's just not as fast as using versions. My 2¢ anyway. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Versions group. To post to this group, send email to versions@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to versions+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/versions?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~--- smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: Feature request: Git support
I understand where the other posters are coming from, but thought I'd chime in as well. I'd have no problem paying full price for a versions git as well. I read the other posts and I realize this might not be worth it for the software developers, but if they are ever on the edge... I don't understand all the differences between git and svn, except that my developer is a huge fan of git, and he's the smartest person I know. Git does seem tidier in a lot of ways. Gitx is pretty bad if you're used to versions, and while I can use terminal to manage git, it's just not as fast as using versions. My 2¢ anyway. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Versions group. To post to this group, send email to versions@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to versions+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/versions?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Feature request: Git support
Good point Quinn. I'll pose the question, how much would a person be willing to pay for having a Git App that is of the same quality of Versions? I'll pay another 39 pounds for a Git client app. Who wouldn't? I think Git support would be feature for a paid upgrade to Versions (if they wish to support both svn and git) IMHO. GitX is nice for commits and reviews...that's it. Same with GitNub (if not less). The other clients are just notwell, they are not Versions let me put it that way. Pico, Sofaname your price for either a paid upgrade for Git support in Versions or an app dedicated for Git...I know I'll fork over the dough. On Jul 25, 4:09 pm, Quinn Taylor quinntay...@mac.com wrote: Not gonna happen — there are already threads on this. The paradigms of centralized and decentralized version controls systems are radically different, and there's not a good way to represent both in the same app. Look at GitX (http://gitx.frim.nl) for a nice OS X client for git. From an economical standpoint, it would not be smart to support git in Versions, either — users always want more for free, but it costs to develop features, and the cost would either have to be passed on to buyers (increased price, and/or paid upgrade for existing users, both of which are bad options) or eaten by the developers, essentially as a gamble that the added features will draw enough new purchases to offset the cost. Neither is a good idea. Further, those of us who only use SVN would rather that SVN bugs and enhancements get patched, rather than having the developers devote countless hours to adding git support. - Quinn On Jul 24, 2009, at 2:19 AM, frebro wrote: Would it be possible for Versions to support both Git and Svn repositories? It would be nice to be able to collect all repos in the same app regardless of protocol. smime.p7s 3KViewDownload --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Versions group. To post to this group, send email to versions@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to versions+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/versions?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Feature request: Git support
Koen — Great point, I had neglected to mention that the 3 main distributed VCS tools (git, Mercurial, and Bazaar) are all under GPL, which makes it difficult or impossible to create a commercial tool that uses them. The same restriction prevents Apple (at least currently) from providing a git plugin for Xcode, for example. Open- sourcing Xcode just isn't an option. George — I had alluded to this, but a paid upgrade to add support for tool X to Versions is a very bad idea — those of us who don't care about other tools would not want to upgrade, and Sofa/Pico would have to worry about maintaining new SVN features, bug fixes, etc. in parallel across multiple editions of the app. Since I'm not a git user, I'll admit I'm not very knowledgeable about the state of git tools for Mac, but I had heard that (in general) there has not yet been a GUI killer app for git — all of them have limitations and failings. IMHO, the use of GPL itself results in a web of interrelated problems: (1) no killer GUI means only command-line nerds can/will use it currently, (2) companies can't produce a paid app around it, and consequently (3) any work on a GUI app is done by the (admittedly small) subset of people who currently use git, would like to see a GUI app for working with git (already a limited subset, since they already use git just fine without a GUI), and have time to burn on creating an app that must be open-source. Unfortunately, this subset hasn't yet produced a killer app, and (IMO) is unlikely to unless a company devotes significant resources to developing such an app, with the express purpose of giving it away for free. It's clearly not impossible (CollabNet is a huge force behind Subversion, after all, but that's also a core technology, not a GUI app) but much less likely than it would be under more permissive licensing conditions. Just look how long it took for Versions to be written, despite the opportunity and obvious need. :-) - Quinn On Jul 26, 2009, at 5:45 AM, Koen Bok wrote: Hey Quinn and George, I would argue the economical thing is not too important once git gains some critical mass. It's still small compared to svn, and in a way the compete with Mercurial which is pretty populair too. A bigger problem would be the licensing as we can't include the Git source without open sourcing our own app due to the GPL license. There are ways around this (wrapping command line) but this generally results in a lesser quality app. - Koen On Jul 26, 5:38 am, curiousgeorge cardena...@gmail.com wrote: Good point Quinn. I'll pose the question, how much would a person be willing to pay for having a Git App that is of the same quality of Versions? I'll pay another 39 pounds for a Git client app. Who wouldn't? I think Git support would be feature for a paid upgrade to Versions (if they wish to support both svn and git) IMHO. GitX is nice for commits and reviews...that's it. Same with GitNub (if not less). The other clients are just notwell, they are not Versions let me put it that way. Pico, Sofaname your price for either a paid upgrade for Git support in Versions or an app dedicated for Git...I know I'll fork over the dough. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Feature request: Git support
Would it be possible for Versions to support both Git and Svn repositories? It would be nice to be able to collect all repos in the same app regardless of protocol. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Versions group. To post to this group, send email to versions@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to versions+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/versions?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Feature request: Git support
Not gonna happen — there are already threads on this. The paradigms of centralized and decentralized version controls systems are radically different, and there's not a good way to represent both in the same app. Look at GitX (http://gitx.frim.nl) for a nice OS X client for git. From an economical standpoint, it would not be smart to support git in Versions, either — users always want more for free, but it costs to develop features, and the cost would either have to be passed on to buyers (increased price, and/or paid upgrade for existing users, both of which are bad options) or eaten by the developers, essentially as a gamble that the added features will draw enough new purchases to offset the cost. Neither is a good idea. Further, those of us who only use SVN would rather that SVN bugs and enhancements get patched, rather than having the developers devote countless hours to adding git support. - Quinn On Jul 24, 2009, at 2:19 AM, frebro wrote: Would it be possible for Versions to support both Git and Svn repositories? It would be nice to be able to collect all repos in the same app regardless of protocol. smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
