<p dir="ltr">I'm not a regular contributor either but I believe mercurial (hg) is the better choice as well. Plus the site Bloody Shade mentioned <a href="http://hginit.com/">http://hginit.com/</a> easily explains the transition from svn to hg.</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Jun 13, 2014 9:29 AM, "Bloody Shade" <<a href="mailto:bloodyshade@gmail.com">bloodyshade@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
I'm not sure I can agree with a move to Git, personally.<br>
<br>
There's plenty of drawbacks that also come with git (not that other version controls don't).<br>
I personally use mercurial (hg) for my projects and you can find more info on it and see if you like it at: <a href="http://hginit.com/" target="_blank">http://hginit.com/</a><br>
<br>
I found this article with some things I also don't like about git, in case anybody else is wondering (although I'm sure there's more):<br>
<a href="http://steveko.wordpress.com/2012/02/24/10-things-i-hate-about-git/" target="_blank">http://steveko.wordpress.com/<u></u>2012/02/24/10-things-i-hate-<u></u>about-git/</a><br>
<br>
Then again, I'm not a regular contributor, so feel free to ignore this, but I thought it would be worth throwing my 2 cents.<br>
<br>
On 6/13/2014 10:13 AM, Kevin Zheng wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----<br>
Hash: SHA1<br>
<br>
Hi all,<br>
<br>
Crossfire originally lived in the world of CVS, until a handful of brave<br>
knights ventured to move it to SVN. Today I believe it is time to move<br>
again, and this time to Git.<br>
<br>
Git is a distributed version control system, which means that checking<br>
out an old revision or reading the commit log does not require accessing<br>
the sometimes painfully slow servers on the Internet. Each 'clone' of<br>
the repository is a fully-functioning repository on its own. This means<br>
that developers, even those who do not have commit access, can work on<br>
projects at their own pace and submit them with tools such as `git<br>
format-patch` and others.<br>
<br>
Git makes branching easy. It makes maintaining them manageable. As an<br>
example, several important fixes were made in 'trunk', which have yet to<br>
be backported to 1.12.0. In addition, there are no release engineering<br>
branches, which means that each release is simply cut from the next<br>
'trunk' state in line. Even "trivial" fixes could benefit from topic<br>
branches, but SVN does not make this easy, convenient, or fun. Using Git<br>
branches would help create a more stable codebase by improving release<br>
engineering and adopting intermediate "stable" branches that servers can<br>
track. A recent autotools bug that wiped server configuration files, for<br>
example, could have been prevented if changes on the bleeding edge were<br>
evaluated by test servers first.<br>
<br>
Git is not terribly difficult to use. Right now I access the SVN<br>
repository through a local Git clone, but this is inadequate because I<br>
cannot publish my topic branches (without considerably difficulty). A<br>
migration that preserves tags, branches, and full revision history can<br>
be made as fast as the revisions are pulled from SVN.<br>
<br>
In summary, a few important benefits of using Git:<br>
<br>
- - Contributors can work on the code easier, with revision control.<br>
- - Distributed, so works without (slow) Internet access.<br>
- - Encourages branching -> more stable codebase.<br>
- - Easy to use and migrate to.<br>
- - Full (all revision history) repository size: 21.7 MiB (server), 13.9<br>
MiB (client), 106.1 MiB (maps)<br>
<br>
However, there are a few immediate problems:<br>
<br>
Most projects using SVN make extensive use of the revision number<br>
identifiers. Crossfire is no different. Git has revision (commit)<br>
identifiers, but they are meaningless without the repository, whereas<br>
SVN increments the number for each commit. I do not believe this is an<br>
issue, because client compatibility is not determined by this<br>
specifier, plugin versions are only checked to match, and other uses<br>
of the identifier can be removed.<br>
<br>
Of course, comments, questions, and hate mail are always welcome.<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Kevin Zheng<br>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----<br>
Version: GnuPG v2<br>
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - <a href="http://www.enigmail.net/" target="_blank">http://www.enigmail.net/</a><br>
<br>
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTmvjyAAoJEOrPD3<u></u>bCLhCQsEIH/2CnCPs/<u></u>FmKlGmgkMw98zo/b<br>
vIFMiFiMZsuEteKUajXZb3+<u></u>OfabyvCTBJZc3nVOlVwxt6xT+<u></u>9NcspmdPYIofqt2M<br>
24fhSY7LqSF5Odc/afQX6JrA21fgF/<u></u>ryU6jc1Iri2+13Wk6TDEhQqZ/<u></u>ASdSmaaZm<br>
IXd9iPb8D7EbSmp0pqvAGKriExVZDS<u></u>IuukXmOQzbjG8mqFgczBnNdxP62bPh<u></u>2H03<br>
NyMbd+nCFfaaXAca/<u></u>5wGZgrqmx0OU8DiRx9FTKzwp1/<u></u>Ku3t09PT9aUbuOY6qUKAU<br>
kdOQfdp8naAxCbf38B/9k+IU5lk+<u></u>JFcbs576X3lreU0xyr1byZyparkfNO<u></u>Lk3XE=<br>
=lsHS<br>
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----<br>
______________________________<u></u>_________________<br>
crossfire mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:crossfire@metalforge.org" target="_blank">crossfire@metalforge.org</a><br>
<a href="http://mailman.metalforge.org/mailman/listinfo/crossfire" target="_blank">http://mailman.metalforge.org/<u></u>mailman/listinfo/crossfire</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
---<br>
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.<br>
<a href="http://www.avast.com" target="_blank">http://www.avast.com</a><br>
<br>
______________________________<u></u>_________________<br>
crossfire mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:crossfire@metalforge.org" target="_blank">crossfire@metalforge.org</a><br>
<a href="http://mailman.metalforge.org/mailman/listinfo/crossfire" target="_blank">http://mailman.metalforge.org/<u></u>mailman/listinfo/crossfire</a><br>
</blockquote></div>