OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]
Re: [xml-dev] OT: Suggestion for new OSS SCC site / tool for xmlsh ? SourceForge has gone to the dark side.


On 2013 Nov 25, at 14:42, Michael Sokolov wrote:

> David, I researched these options a year or so ago and concluded it was time to learn git/github; however lack of good support for hosting large binaries kind of forces you to host those elsewhere. Google code seems like the other main option.  I wonder if there isn't a possibility SF will right the ship, though?
> About git: you can use git more-or-less like svn, although there are definitely extra steps.  One thing I have come to really like about it is the ability to commit changes without immediately sharing them with the world (you commit, and then push, as two steps). You could do this with svn branches, kind of, but they seem so heavyweight and I never really use them as much as perhaps I should. I do find myself searching stackoverflow every so often when I get into weird git situations.

At the risk of drifting off-topic, and going to a bad bad place...

If someone's thinking about moving away from svn, I'll note that Git isn't the only alternative.  Mercurial has much the same functionality and a model, but manages (it seems to me) to be very, very much more ... civil in its interactions with the user.

I was obliged to choose between the two, two or three years ago, I chose Mercurial based largely on the quality of its documentation and tutorials, and I have at no point regretted this.  I've since been obliged to use git for some projects, but I would never choose that for a project of my own; I would never go back to svn voluntarily.

Git's two main advantages are Github and its very broad mindshare.  bitbucket.org has (*cough*) borrowed pretty shamelessly from Github for its Mercurial support, but is still missing some bells and whistles.  There are some things that Git can do more easily than Mercurial could, but they seem to be sufficiently arcane that I've never felt sure I understood the corresponding use-cases ('but I don't _want_ to do a triple backward somersault, with pike!').

There's a good Mercurial intro at hginit.com.  There are large projects using Mercurial (Python, OpenJDK and Mozilla spring to mine), so it's not some weirdo niche system.

In my more grumpy moods, I feel there's a bit of a resonance between Git and C++.  Sure, there are cases where X is the right tool for the job.  But in a lot of cases, I strongly suspect it's machismo.  When feeling less grumpy (ie, when I haven't had to spend time with Git), I think it's just the effect of mindshare, and I should lighten up....

All the best,

(who uses vi _and_ emacs!)

Norman Gray  :  http://nxg.me.uk
SUPA School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, UK

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]

News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 1993-2007 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS