Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #32246 > unrolled thread
| Started by | e.d.programmer@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-08-03 08:00 -0700 |
| Last post | 2015-08-03 21:10 -0400 |
| Articles | 9 — 6 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.java.programmer
Source Management e.d.programmer@gmail.com - 2015-08-03 08:00 -0700
Re: Source Management Cecil Westerhof <Cecil@decebal.nl> - 2015-08-03 18:04 +0200
Re: Source Management e.d.programmer@gmail.com - 2015-08-03 12:08 -0700
Re: Source Management leif.roar@dimnakorr.com - 2015-08-03 16:09 -0500
Re: Source Management Eternal Hope <laughingspam99@gmail.com> - 2015-08-03 21:36 +0100
Re: Source Management Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-08-04 09:15 +0000
Re: Source Management Eternal Hope <laughingspam99@gmail.com> - 2015-08-04 17:02 +0100
Re: Source Management Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2015-08-03 21:06 +0000
Re: Source Management Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2015-08-03 21:10 -0400
| From | e.d.programmer@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-03 08:00 -0700 |
| Subject | Source Management |
| Message-ID | <d3240fa5-2144-4dee-8249-62882bd6b02d@googlegroups.com> |
There was another thread discussing Sourceforge and github which was off topic so I started a new thread. What is a good offline source management software? We're using SourceTree but either it needs a lot of configuration we can't figure out or it just plain sucks. We need source management to sync changes between a few systems. We have systems on 2 PCs possibly 3 plus 1 test server and 1 live server. SourceTree is a free program that sort of does this but I never liked it. 1) At least half the time I push changes to the servers it's pushing everything. I can change 1 file and have to wait for it to copy every file it's tracking which takes a long time and messes up modified timestamps. 2) It only has Hotfixes, Features, and Releases. If I finish a Hotfix it puts the changes out to the test server and the live server. If I finish a Feature it can put changes out to just the test server, but then I create a Release to put those changes out to the live server and it gets every Feature, so I can't use Features to put things on the test server unless they're all going live at the same time.
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Cecil Westerhof <Cecil@decebal.nl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-03 18:04 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <87r3nknytc.fsf@Equus.decebal.nl> |
| In reply to | #32246 |
On Monday 3 Aug 2015 17:00 CEST, e. d. programmer wrote: > There was another thread discussing Sourceforge and github which was > off topic so I started a new thread. What is a good offline source > management software? We're using SourceTree but either it needs a > lot of configuration we can't figure out or it just plain sucks. I prefer Git. -- Cecil Westerhof Senior Software Engineer LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/cecilwesterhof
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | e.d.programmer@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-03 12:08 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <2db91419-16e8-49ce-b4bb-9fabbed08522@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #32247 |
On Monday, August 3, 2015 at 12:28:48 PM UTC-4, Cecil Westerhof wrote: > I prefer Git. SourceTree is git. There's a git command for each GUI option. I don't know what the commands should be to get it working properly for a couple users on a LAN.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | leif.roar@dimnakorr.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-03 16:09 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <kK6dnQhEx8jrRSLInZ2dnUU78d-dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #32249 |
e.d.programmer@gmail.com wrote: > > SourceTree is git. There's a git command for each GUI option. I don't know > what the commands should be to get it working properly for a couple users on > a LAN. Just use Git on the command line. If necessary, pick up the O'Reilly book on Git to read. -- Leif Roar Moldskred
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Eternal Hope <laughingspam99@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-03 21:36 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mpoja7$t7e$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #32246 |
On 03/08/2015 16:00, e.d.programmer@gmail.com wrote: > There was another thread discussing Sourceforge and github which was off topic so I started a new thread. > What is a good offline source management software? We're using SourceTree but either it needs a lot of configuration we can't figure out or it just plain sucks. Well it might suck, or it might not depending on your point of view but I'm pretty sure you can do anything you need to with git, after all, it's the tool used to manage the Linux kernel source and there are probably dozens if not hundreds of contributors to that. I can't say I've found the canonical git documentation. This link https://progit.org/ points to the docs I'm currently using. I only use the Linux terminal CLI I have to admit, fancy GUI interfaces don't *always* make things clearer/easier to use, at least not for me. -- Laughing Spam Fritter
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-04 09:15 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mppvrn$qhi$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #32250 |
On Mon, 03 Aug 2015 21:36:55 +0100, Eternal Hope wrote: > On 03/08/2015 16:00, e.d.programmer@gmail.com wrote: >> There was another thread discussing Sourceforge and github which was >> off topic so I started a new thread. >> What is a good offline source management software? We're using >> SourceTree but either it needs a lot of configuration we can't figure >> out or it just plain sucks. > > Well it might suck, or it might not depending on your point of view but > I'm pretty sure you can do anything you need to with git, after all, > it's the tool used to manage the Linux kernel source and there are > probably dozens if not hundreds of contributors to that. > > I can't say I've found the canonical git documentation. > This link https://progit.org/ points to the docs I'm currently using. I > only use the Linux terminal CLI I have to admit, fancy GUI interfaces > don't *always* make things clearer/easier to use, at least not for me. I suppose the mother lode is "Pro Git" by Scott Chacon and Ben Straub. Its downloadable from http://git-scm.com/book/en/v2 as PDF, mobi or epub, is readable as HTML from that URL. Or you can buy a paper copy. I thought that was overkill but like dead-tree reference material, so I bought the "GIT Pocket Guide" by Richard Silverman, an O'Reilly book. As a user guide its fine except for one point that rather screwed me up when I set up my first git repository for a pre-existing source tree: the "Ignoring files" section on page 42 should be at the end of page 38, because you need to tell git which files to ignore *before* you create the empty repository. If you do things in the order given in the book you find you've sucked files you'd want to ignore, such as *.class files, into the repository before setting up the to-be-ignored list. -- martin@ | Martin Gregorie gregorie. | Essex, UK org |
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Eternal Hope <laughingspam99@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-04 17:02 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mpqnjt$qua$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #32257 |
On 04/08/2015 10:15, Martin Gregorie wrote: > On Mon, 03 Aug 2015 21:36:55 +0100, Eternal Hope wrote: > >> On 03/08/2015 16:00, e.d.programmer@gmail.com wrote: <snip> > I suppose the mother lode is "Pro Git" by Scott Chacon and Ben Straub. > Its downloadable from > > http://git-scm.com/book/en/v2 > > as PDF, mobi or epub, is readable as HTML from that URL. Or you can buy a > paper copy. > > I thought that was overkill but like dead-tree reference material, so I > bought the "GIT Pocket Guide" by Richard Silverman, an O'Reilly book. > > As a user guide its fine except for one point that rather screwed me up > when I set up my first git repository for a pre-existing source tree: the > "Ignoring files" section on page 42 should be at the end of page 38, > because you need to tell git which files to ignore *before* you create > the empty repository. If you do things in the order given in the book you > find you've sucked files you'd want to ignore, such as *.class files, > into the repository before setting up the to-be-ignored list. I like the way it just keeps all it's stuff in one place and doesn't scatter files and directories all over your file system or interact in any way with your source directories like some source management things do (IIRC). If you make a cock-up setting things up just delete .git and start again. Probably not a good idea if you have a commit history in there however :-) I'll check the book out, thanks -- Laughing Spam Fritter
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-03 21:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <mpol4s$4gq$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #32246 |
On Mon, 03 Aug 2015 08:00:17 -0700, e.d.programmer wrote: > There was another thread discussing Sourceforge and github which was off > topic so I started a new thread. > What is a good offline source management software? We're using > SourceTree but either it needs a lot of configuration we can't figure > out or it just plain sucks. > The only ones I've used are CVS, PVCS and git. Comments: CVS --- This is widespread on *nix OSes. I've not seen it on Windows. Its biggest disadvantage is that version control is only at the individual file level: there's no facility for treating a group of files as a persistent commitment unit. Although it will let you commit a number of files at once and share the same commit description, this is merely a convenience and not a way of ensuring that the same group of files are permanently tied together as a persistent group that is always handled as, say, the set of sources that define a version of a program or system. Its biggest advantages are that its 'just there' on all *nixen and that, because all files and indexes are just text files in directories, you can fix any problems with a text editor, chown and chmod. Because it maintains a single central repository, it can only be used offline if the repository is on a shared disk or is mounted on a single, multi-user computer. PVCS ---- I've only used this on one project. Its a commercial Windows app that seemed to offer very similar capabilities to CVS including its use of a single, central repository. GIT --- I'm still learning about it. Since its a distributed system, every programmer with commitment rights has their own repository (in the .git directory of the directory tree where they hold the files for the project its managing. This means that it can be used offline except then a programmer is pushing his sources to the master repository and/or pulling changes out of the master repository. Changes to several files can be made into a commitment group, but, like CVS, this doesn't deem to have all that much significance when it comes to maintaining a large, long lasting system. Other ----- I have seen other version control systems that could and did use the concept of system versions to make horizontal slices across the vertical stack of versions of each individual file under its control. This meant that you could freeze a version (so the VCS kept a permanent picture of the production system while development of later versions continued) and then open a bug-fix version over that and the next development version above that. Why? well, for starters changes applied to the bug-fix version 'floated up' and would appear in the higher version(s) unless they had altered or removed the code that was affected by the bug. I've always thought this was an excellent VCS, but unfortunately it was only ever implemented on a single mainframe OS whict I no longer use. Anyway ------ I hope these comments help you select a suitable VCS. -- martin@ | Martin Gregorie gregorie. | Essex, UK org |
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-03 21:10 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <55c010ef$0$290$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> |
| In reply to | #32246 |
On 8/3/2015 11:00 AM, e.d.programmer@gmail.com wrote: > We need source management to sync changes between a few systems. We > have systems on 2 PCs possibly 3 plus 1 test server and 1 live > server. SourceTree is a free program that sort of does this but I > never liked it. 1) At least half the time I push changes to the > servers it's pushing everything. I can change 1 file and have to > wait for it to copy every file it's tracking which takes a long time > and messes up modified timestamps. 2) It only has Hotfixes, > Features, and Releases. If I finish a Hotfix it puts the changes out > to the test server and the live server. If I finish a Feature it can > put changes out to just the test server, but then I create a Release > to put those changes out to the live server and it gets every > Feature, so I can't use Features to put things on the test server > unless they're all going live at the same time. For Java development I think the two most obvious choices are SVN and Git. Those two have the best tool support where you can chose between IDE, standalone GUI tool and command line tool. Both are excellent products. The main difference is in their model where SVN uses central repo and Git uses distributed repos. Due to that Git is better for open source projects. But for your usage then SVN will do fine. Arne
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.programmer
csiph-web