Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

which dvcs do you use?

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-02 22:16

git and darcs here.

git for github mainly. but darcs is more simple (on how to manage on my mind)

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-02 22:20

Git.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-03 4:26

My brain.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-03 6:37

Git and Bazaar.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-03 14:31

I've been playing with Fossil[1] lately; it's pretty cool.

It's got a simple wiki and bug tracker built right in, which is nice.

Appeal to authority: SQLite uses it!

[1] http://fossil-scm.org/

lolol even Mercurial was too mainstream xd!!!

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-03 15:53

>>5
I also use Fossil for my own projects. I almost cum with delight when I find software so compact and easy to use. The idea of a single binary which provides a wiki/bug tracker/version control system is erotic in the extreme.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-03 17:59

>>3
nice distributed my friend.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-03 18:15

>>6

Indeed.

The built-in zip export is awesome too -- I always hated having to either walk people through installing RapidSVN or manually creating a bunch of tarballs on my web server.

I do find it annoying that I can't co arbitrary subdirectories and thus have to create multiple repositories, but
* I think all DVCSes work this way, and
* At least I can just point the CGI at a directory of repository files.

>>7

Perhaps he's scatterbrained?

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-03 18:21

>>8

[list]
[*] I think all DVCSes work this way, and
[*] At least I can just point the CGI at a directory of repository files.
[/list]

ENTERPRISE bbCODE DEVELOPER

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-03 18:21

>>8

[list]
[*] I think all DVCSes work this way, and
[*] At least I can just point the CGI at a directory of repository files.
[/list]

ENTERPRISE bbCODE DEVELOPER

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-03 18:24

>>9
>>10

God damn it.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-03 18:41

ants do their best now and are tickling my shirikodama like thousands of little penises

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-12 18:34

fossil

My face when I went on a long ferry ride and was able to program, make bugzilla[1] entries, and write documentation offline and then just $ fossil sync it all when I arrived.

[1]: I use ``Bugzilla'' as a generic name for issue-tracking systems.  Deal with it nerds.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-12 19:03

{{"", { "", "{"",""},{""},"",""}},{"",""}}

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-12 20:49

>>6
The idea of a single binary which provides a wiki/bug tracker/version control system is erotic in the extreme.
Someone failed to grasp the Unix philosophy.

>>8
The built-in zip export is awesome too
git archive --format=zip

Going through the feature list, everything that distinguishes fossil from git or hg just seems like a useless or actively harmful thing to be doing. Hipster gonna hip.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-13 2:43

>>15

unix

The integrated approach is nicer for off line use, since syncing the repository not only gives you the latest bugs but lets you interact with them as well.

Even on line it's convenient to have integrated bug, wiki, and version control accounts, and certainly for my personal use the integration of bug tracking is great because I'm far too lazy to set up an external bug tracker.

zip

Oh OK; the only other version control system I've used is Subversion, so I can only compare to that.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-13 7:58

>>16
I completely agree on the bug thing. That's fucking awesome. As for the wiki, I don't see a reason to put this into the VCS. If you mean for documentation, that's better done with literal programming and simple text docs in a doc/ prefix. Hell, maybe even using a documentation generator.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-13 10:29

>>15
Zip is for fags. Real men use tar.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-13 11:08

>>18
Agreed, and that's git's default format. I just pointed out that it can also do zip because that's what >>8 mentioned.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-13 13:07

>>16
The integrated approach has nothing to do with off line use, in terms of how it conflicts with UNIX philosophy. Once you make a pull with git you can be offline for as long as you like.

since syncing the repository not only gives you the latest bugs but lets you interact with them as well
What does that even mean? How's that different from git or mercurial?

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-13 16:40

>>17

wiki

Even the guy who wrote Fossil uses doc/ instead of the separate wiki functionality now.

>>18

It can do tar as well.

>>20

It has a built-in bug tracker that also works offline through push/pull.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-13 18:12

>>15
Fuck the UNIX philosophy.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-13 19:43

>>22
fuck you

Name: HugePenis 2012-04-13 20:03

>>23
And your mother?

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-13 20:17

>>23
No, fuck you, you idiotic freetard shithead.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-13 21:23

>>25
implying

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-13 23:44

>>26
Gargle with my dickcheese, faggot.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-13 23:56

tar cvjf code.`date +%s`.tar.bz2 /path/to/code

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-14 1:02

>>27
‮''eseehckcid′′
‭Sounds like something an unclean, uncircumcised goyim would have. Your blatant disregard for hygienic body modification is disgusting.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-14 3:59

mercurial for my own probablty never-to-publish projects

git for working with homies(because they use github)

dropbox for keeping copy of whole repository

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-14 7:23

zip an usb sticks. gotta keep et on da cloudd

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-15 0:37

>>15

zip export

The point is that instead of either teaching people how to install a {git, svn, ...} client or manually throwing up {zip files, tarballs} on a web server, I can just point them to
http://example.com/fossil/project/zip/project.zip?uuid=tip and let them download it straight from the repo.

I'm sure some of the fancy web interfaces for other version control systems can do that too, but then you have to set up and configure a web interface -- with Fossil it Just Works.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-15 2:59

Bazaar.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-15 13:59

>>32
Why do you even want to distribute source to people who obviously don't know what to do with it?

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-15 15:17

>>32
cgit does this just fine

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-15 16:13

>>34
by providing a lowest common denominator means of delivery, they can extract it, compile it, or set up a repository using their own system without having to use yours.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-15 16:39

>>34
In compliance of the GPL. You wouldn't want someone to sue you for making source code retrieval unnecessarily difficult.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-15 17:01

>>36

Exactly.  I don't like it when I have to install Mercurial or Bazaar or whatever just to get some small program, so why should I force my SCM choice on anybody else?

Name: bampu pantsu 2012-05-29 4:09

bampu pantsu
Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List
All trademarks and copyrights on this site are owned by their respective parties. All comments and posts are the responsibility of their own posters.
- Tinychan + 2ch Mode -