Developer forums (C::B DEVELOPMENT STRICTLY!) > Development
Will C::B ever move to Git w/ Github or Gitlab?
oBFusCATed:
--- Quote from: Lazauya on May 02, 2021, 02:52:32 am ---So is this the thing stopping migration? Or are there other reasons too?
--- End quote ---
Nope. I've listed the main issue - the benefit for us doesn't pay for the cost of transition.
I prefer to work on bugs/features instead of being bothered with working on this.
If you want to contribute you'll contribute and there is a way to do it if you want to use the github tools.
Do you require that your name/email is stored as the commit author? If you inspect our svn/git history you'll see that we give credit to contributors in the commit message.
WinterMute:
--- Quote from: oBFusCATed on May 02, 2021, 08:52:52 am ---
--- Quote from: Lazauya on May 02, 2021, 02:52:32 am ---So is this the thing stopping migration? Or are there other reasons too?
--- End quote ---
Nope. I've listed the main issue - the benefit for us doesn't pay for the cost of transition.
--- End quote ---
What's the cost of transition? Can anything be done to ease that cost or is this just another way to say that you don't see the benefit & won't be switching to git any time soon?
--- Quote ---Do you require that your name/email is stored as the commit author? If you inspect our svn/git history you'll see that we give credit to contributors in the commit message.
--- End quote ---
Thing about github though is that some employers like to look at a candidate's github commit history and upstream contributions. If you just give credit in the commit message then they won't show up in the contributor list.
--- Quote from: oBFusCATed on May 02, 2021, 08:45:02 am ---stahta01: Keep in mind that the github "trolls" don't request just a switch to git, it is "you're on github or I won't contribute to your project" mantra which I don't understand.
--- End quote ---
Speaking for myself personally I have to say I've got used to git and contributing patches in particular ways using the tools git provides. If someone is insisting on using subversion for source control then I feel like I'll be making their life harder than it needs to be by using a git related workflow to contribute so I probably won't bother. I do think git is orders of magnitude better than subversion but I'm not going to argue about it I'm just not going back to subversion (or indeed CVS and especially not SourceSafe).
oBFusCATed:
--- Quote from: WinterMute on May 02, 2021, 01:36:28 pm ---What's the cost of transition? Can anything be done to ease that cost or is this just another way to say that you don't see the benefit & won't be switching to git any time soon?
--- End quote ---
I don't know. Probably two-three weeks of developer time would be required. My time I can spend on the project is limited and I prefer to do actual improvements to the software.
--- Quote from: WinterMute on May 02, 2021, 01:36:28 pm ---Thing about github though is that some employers like to look at a candidate's github commit history and upstream contributions. If you just give credit in the commit message then they won't show up in the contributor list.
--- End quote ---
You can list the hashes in a repo in your resume/cv if this is the only public thing you've done and you're proud of it and thinks it is important.
--- Quote from: WinterMute on May 02, 2021, 01:36:28 pm ---Speaking for myself personally I have to say I've got used to git and contributing patches in particular ways using the tools git provides. If someone is insisting on using subversion for source control then I feel like I'll be making their life harder than it needs to be by using a git related workflow to contribute so I probably won't bother. I do think git is orders of magnitude better than subversion but I'm not going to argue about it I'm just not going back to subversion (or indeed CVS and especially not SourceSafe).
--- End quote ---
I only use svn to checkout the repo in order to make ubuntu night builds. I use git exclusively for everything else, I'm fine if you post git patches or pull requests. So C::B is not requesting svn patches only. But the github trolls insist that the whole project needs to be on github otherwise they won't contribute.
Lazauya:
--- Quote from: oBFusCATed on May 02, 2021, 07:41:01 pm ---I don't know. Probably two-three weeks of developer time would be required. My time I can spend on the project is limited and I prefer to do actual improvements to the software.
--- End quote ---
So are there any developers that would WANT to do it? I definitely would be down to set it up myself. If I could get it set up with CI and transfer the repository would that work?
oBFusCATed:
Set up what? You don't have full access to the sf.net project, so you probably cannot dump and import the tickets. You'll have to do some kind of user remapping which you cannot do without talking to devs and other users which have posted tickets.
I repeat: The repository is already on github!!! It could be found here https://github.com/obfuscated/codeblocks_sf . You can post patches or pull requests against it!
I repeat: I use git to develop codeblocks. I'm doing this for something like the last 8-9 years.
Why do you want the whole project to be on github? What would be the benefit for you as an external to C::B developer if the whole project is on github (sans the requirement to have a forum/sf.net login)?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version