Code::Blocks Forums
User forums => General (but related to Code::Blocks) => Topic started by: JGM on September 30, 2011, 07:15:57 pm
-
Hi I just received an email about berlios eliminating the service and since I dont see anything about this on codeblocks forums I was posting just in case, since they are telling developers to move the projects to another repo.
http://developer.berlios.de/forum/forum.php?forum_id=37450
Terrible bad news :(
-
Can I put in a vote for CB's next host - anywhere but SourceForge.
-
Can I put in a vote for CB's next host - anywhere but SourceForge.
Other that that, can you also give reasons for such a statement?
-
Would Google Code be an acceptable place?
-
Bad news!
I registered the codeblocks.googlecode.com, and ready to transfer ownership.
Looks googlecode is a good choice.
And maybe we can switch to Git version control system.
-
And maybe we can switch to Git version control system.
Is there any particular reason to want to abandon SVN? It has been serving its purpose fine until now, as far as I can see.
-
I also feel comfortable with svn, but I am open for git (if it really fits all our needs).
But I would prefer not to have google as hosting platform, it's not trustworthy in my opinion (this is just my personal feeling).
-
Would Google Code be an acceptable place?
why not sourceforge?
also, i do not have a high speed network, so git is much better to view the changlog and diff on different revisions.
-
But I would prefer not to have google as hosting platform, it's not trustworthy in my opinion (this is just my personal feeling).
I agree on that. In addition, SF has more features we might want to make use of, like MANTIS. Also, most of us have an account on SF anyways and I don't really want to have a Google account, if possible.
Coming to GIT - I agree with Thomas here, the only meaningful client that really takes things away from command line tools is SmartGIT, which (starting with the next version) also supports strong SVN/GIT coupling. You might be aware that those systems work very well together if setup properly (we do that at work that way).
This brings me to the last topic: I *think* we can have both: SVN and GIT and keep them in sync. As we have 2 alive SVN branches I don't want to switch for the moment without merging them first. I'll check, if SF offers tidy coupling of GIT and SVN repos...
-
> Other that that, can you also give reasons for such a statement?
I just find SF immensely user unfriendly, both as a maintainer, a downloader and a contributor. I started trying to use it for my own FOSS projects (none anywhere near as big as CB, it must be said), and gave up. I then switched to Google Code, with whom I've had no real problems for a couple of years, and who are currently hosting 8 of my projects.
Having said that, I'm not a contributor to CB, and of course the preferences of you devs must take precedence. I'd just like to see you not diving head-first into SF without considering the alternatives carefully - you do have a couple of months to make up your minds, after all.
-
I do not know what I would suggest between SourceForge and Google Code. From a user standpoint, SourceForge looks more polished, and is more commonly used. However, the pages load slower, the downloads (currently) have a countdown timer, and ads are very visible.
Google Code is not anything special visually. However, navigating its pages is snappy, and download links are direct (I think).
Bad news!
I registered the codeblocks.googlecode.com, and ready to transfer ownership.
Looks googlecode is a good choice.
Just curious... did you mean to say "Good news!"?
-
I'm not a contributor too, but I would just say something about sourceforge: it is unusable from some countries.
But I agree I hope you won't migrate to googlecode... (And I just notice that it is unusable for some countries too)
There are a few weeks, I have started a little project, and so I have searched about informations on different hosting sites.
I have found a nice document on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open_source_software_hosting_facilities
I hope it will help you to choose the right one. (my personal choice were gna.org, and it was simply easy to set-up trackers and versioning system. The problem is that there is only cvs and svn, as far as I know, and no wiki too... so I don't think you will choose it.)
It is a terrible new that berliOS stop...
-
I guess the wiki is hosted on codeblocks.org, not on berlios.de, so there is no problem with it.
-
How about github.com?
-
No support for svn, I guess :)
-
No support for svn, I guess :)
Reading with svn (also TortoiseSVN) should work: https://github.com/blog/626-announcing-svn-support (https://github.com/blog/626-announcing-svn-support) , if it is really not an april's fool.
I did not test it.
-
OK, I'll correct myself --> there is no commit-svn-support 8)
-
Do c::b developers have a final decision where to host the c::b source code in the feature?
Not only the source code, but also the files/feature request/bug report should be moved to the new host.
-
Not only the source code, but also the files/feature request/bug report should be moved to the new host.
Do you know how? We can export them, but then what?
I guess all will be lost and we will start in a clean bug-tracker...
-
I prefer sourceforge.
-
I prefer sourceforge.
Sourceforge is a nice forge, but, as googlecode, it is close to some countries.
There had been some remarks about their politic, too (I don't exactly remember what, and I think that was probably rumors), and, imho, their interface have lose many things that made me fan of it. It is now just one forge, for me.
-
but, as googlecode, it is close to some countries
Which is interesting, since this is against par. 5 of the DFSG, yet Debian includes projects that host their source on Sourceforge and Google. Honi soit qui mal y pense... 8)
-
but, as googlecode, it is close to some countries
Which is interesting, since this is against par. 5 of the DFSG, yet Debian includes projects that host their source on Sourceforge and Google. Honi soit qui mal y pense... 8)
But the sources of all debian packages are available on debians servers also, and as far as I know debian does not block some countries/regions.
-
Isn't launchpad an option? It's the only one with integrated translation system. Yes, it uses bazaar, but less popular doesn't automatically mean bad.
Interesting article: http://doc.bazaar.canonical.com/migration/en/why-switch-to-bazaar.html
-
From the article on Wikipedia, Launchpad is not a host like sf/berlios, but only meant for OS/distro integrators. It is not hosting the projects just replicating them.
-
I read whole wikipedia article and can't confirm this. To make a little quote:
Other prominent projects using Launchpad for various aspects of managing their development include:
Drizzle
GNOME Do
Inkscape (bug tracking, code hosting)[6][7]
Linux Mint (bug tracking, blueprints, and translations)[8][9]
MySQL (code hosting)[10]
Pinta (bug tracking and translations)
Upstart
Zope 3 (bug tracking)[11]
Mmm this little article @ launchpad blog might also be interesting: http://blog.launchpad.net/general/welcome-to-berlios-projects
Also don't miss the tour: https://launchpad.net/+tour/index
-
See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open_source_software_hosting_facilities#Available_version_control_systems.2C_more_features
No, svn-commit support, so it doesn't even qualify.
Nor it supports git, why would we want to choose bazaar, because they say it rocks?
If we switch to DVCS it will be 1. git or 2. mercurial.
-
How does it support your "Launchpad is not a host like sf/berlios" thing?
Yeah I told since beginning that it's bazaar stuff. But you didn't mention
single word why it's any worse than mercurial or git... did ya?
Sometimes alternatives provide much better quality and results than the
mainstream stuff and eventually replace older stuff in mainstream, the
same as Code::Blocks is a great IDE and a great alternative to many
other, usually commercial IDEs and has potential to become mainstream.
As far as I know, Code::Blocks uses Ubuntu version numbering scheme,
why wouldn't it use its revision control system. :lol:
Also wxWidgets use GetText for translations so launchpad is the logical
place for any wxWidgets-based application translations.
Also migrating from BerliOS is as simple as few mouse clicks as you can see.
Not to mention how Code::Blocks development could be speeded up with
all the tools launchpad provides for teams. I don't think MySQL team would
use it if it would'nt satisfy all their needs.
Well, completly different possibility might be to host the whole thing on your own?
Personally I wouldn't like to see Code::Blocks on google code, it's a primitive tool
suitable only for single developer, with poor interface and having a Big Brother
always watching you from behind, breathing slowly on your neck.
-
How does it support your "Launchpad is not a host like sf/berlios" thing?
Yeah I told since beginning that it's bazaar stuff. But you didn't mention
single word why it's any worse than mercurial or git... did ya?
It is not popular enough and there is no single person in the C::B team promoting it! We have one for Git.
As far as I know, Code::Blocks uses Ubuntu version numbering scheme,
why wouldn't it use its revision control system. :lol:
There is no connection...
Not to mention how Code::Blocks development could be speeded up with
all the tools launchpad provides for teams. I don't think MySQL team would
use it if it would'nt satisfy all their needs.
We are a small team.
Well, completly different possibility might be to host the whole thing on your own?
It is discussed, but no decision taken...
Personally I wouldn't like to see Code::Blocks on google code, it's a primitive tool
suitable only for single developer, with poor interface and having a Big Brother
always watching you from behind, breathing slowly on your neck.
From what I've see it is a simplistic interface, in a google fashion. I doubt it is worse than berlios.
No-svn, nor-git support disqualifies Launchpad, sorry.
p.s. This is my opinion of course.
-
Of course I do respect your opinion sir, but I worry others won't reconsider anything I said
even for a single second as you closed everything with a strong hammer. And I really hoped
to see more opinions as I'm deciding for/against launchpad for my personal future projects too.
-
Btw who is the guy maintaining this?
https://launchpad.net/codeblocks
-
Btw who is the guy maintaining this?
https://launchpad.net/codeblocks
Maintainer:
Yiannis Mandravellos
-
I'm sorry... Do you believe I can't read? I can assure you I can.
I'm not asking who is maintaining this, but who is the guy
maintaining this.
But meanwhile I understood it's mandrav (http://forums.codeblocks.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2)
-
I just thought about something.
codeblocks' forum, wiki and website are on which server?
If you can add things yourself, maybe you can add it a software forge, so you could choose every tool you want to use? And there are plenty of forges that support more than one VCS. And maybe there is one which can handle synchronization between 2 hosted forges, solving the problem of using git OR mercurial OR subversion OR ....
At least, in this case, it could be possible to have SVN+GIT, or SVN+HG, or any other combination the C::B team choose.
I would like to say that it is a way to "ménager la chèvre et le chou" (I'm not able to translate it, I'm sorry)
-
But someone must spend time to admin it, upgrade it, check if there aren't any security problems.
It is not that simple. And as you know we are underpowered as any other open source project.
-
BTW: svn 1.7.0 fixes one of the problems with svn, the multiple .svn directories, now there is only one in the root of the working copy:)
-
BTW: svn 1.7.0 fixes one of the problems with svn, the multiple .svn directories, now there is only one in the root of the working copy:)
Yes, I updated to TortoiseSVN 1.7.0 some days ago, and it use SVN1.7 library. Then I need to update(In the context menu) my local copy data structure, so only on .svn directory in the root folder now. :D
-
Yeah that really makes it the most advanced and powerfull RCS...
-
But there is one feature of git, that looks really good to me, the local branching.
Working on patches, without the danger to interfere with others is a real cool feature.
-
As if bazaar can't do that. :lol: Okey I stop, I see you're not really open-minded.
-
As if bazaar can't do that. :lol: Okey I stop, I see you're not really open-minded.
Look, the things is really simple: We are very used to SVN and have active branches. So switching now must be done with care. In addition, most core developers have strong experience with GIT. None of us has with bazaar. So why aren't we open-minded if we minimise risk? You should choose your words more carefully. :?
-
As if bazaar can't do that. :lol: Okey I stop, I see you're not really open-minded.
Be careful what you right and stop getting personal, that's something I really don't like.
The only thing I said, that git can do that.
I know bazar can do that too, but I never used it.
I just started to work with git-svn on our subversion repo to test this feature.
I don't have the time to test bazar also (at the moment).
There are plenty of other things to do (family, work and other real lif stuff).
And the decision will be made by the developers and our project-leader, because we have to work with it the most time.
-
But there is one feature of git, that looks really good to me, the local branching.
Working on patches, without the danger to interfere with others is a real cool feature.
I strongly suggest git. :D
Did you c::b developers decided which host will c::b migrate? There two months left. Besides the code database, I think some one(c::b developers) should achieve the bugs/features request, that's also very important database.
PS: After the migration, I'm considering to request for a developer of c::b. 8) Any chance??? or possibility???
-
A (more or less) short post to correct my first one in this thread:
I hope it will help you to choose the right one. (my personal choice were gna.org, and it was simply easy to set-up trackers and versioning system. The problem is that there is only cvs and svn, as far as I know, and no wiki too... so I don't think you will choose it.)
gna.org seem to be moribund. Don't go there.
So I have searched for a better one, and I was stupid to choose gna.org, I should have taken http://savannah.nongnu.org/, which have more CVS support. (at least git, I'm not sure about mercurial or bazaar)
===
About branching, it seem this feature is common in DVCS.
If I understood everything correctly, it is simply done by the structure of decentralization, because each workdir is a working copy, and this is why CVS or SVN don't have it.
About svn 1.7.0, it seem they greatly enhanced performances, too.
-
If I understood everything correctly, it is simply done by the structure of decentralization, because each workdir is a working copy, and this is why CVS or SVN don't have it.
No, it is not because of DVCS, it is because they track changes, but CVS/SVN tracks files.
-
Google Code has subversion support.
http://code.google.com/p/support/wiki/SubversionFAQ#How_do_I_import_my_existing_source_code?
-
I found a good news:
BerliOS Developer: BerliOS continues – non-profit association is founded (https://developer.berlios.de/forum/forum.php?forum_id=37533)
So, we can still use BerlisOS!!!
-
So, we can still use BerlisOS!!!
:) :) :)