Re: LOSTWAGES: Replace references to CVS with Git
Mike McCormack wrote:
Index: templates/en/development.template =================================================================== RCS file: /home/wine/lostwages/templates/en/development.template,v retrieving revision 1.6 diff -u -p -r1.6 development.template --- templates/en/development.template 28 Oct 2005 16:05:10 -0000 1.6 +++ templates/en/development.template 18 Aug 2006 01:02:06 -0000 @@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ WineHQ hosts a number of services aiding the Wine development process.
<ul> - <li><a href="{$root}/site/cvs">Wine CVS tree</a></li> + <li><a href="{$root}/site/git">Wine Git tree</a></li> <li><a href="{$root}/site/contributing">Contributing to Wine</a></li> <li><a href="http://bugs.winehq.org/">Bug tracking</a></li> <li><a href="http://appdb.winehq.org/">Application Database</a></li>
I think we should leave the reference to the CVS tree page (but still add a link to the Git tree). Some people find it easier to work with CVS than Git. -- Rob Shearman
Agreed, CVS is much easier to use in my own opinion, and the packages in the ubuntu repository for git are old and don't function properly at all with the instructions listed on the page, even when substituting git with http:. The web interface to browse the CVS repository is also easier to navigate than that of the git web interface.
From: Robert Shearman <rob(a)codeweavers.com> To: mike(a)codeweavers.com CC: wine-devel(a)winehq.org Subject: Re: LOSTWAGES: Replace references to CVS with Git Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 12:09:42 +0100
Mike McCormack wrote:
Index: templates/en/development.template =================================================================== RCS file: /home/wine/lostwages/templates/en/development.template,v retrieving revision 1.6 diff -u -p -r1.6 development.template --- templates/en/development.template 28 Oct 2005 16:05:10 -0000 1.6 +++ templates/en/development.template 18 Aug 2006 01:02:06 -0000 @@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ WineHQ hosts a number of services aiding the Wine development process.
<ul> - <li><a href="{$root}/site/cvs">Wine CVS tree</a></li> + <li><a href="{$root}/site/git">Wine Git tree</a></li> <li><a href="{$root}/site/contributing">Contributing to Wine</a></li> <li><a href="http://bugs.winehq.org/">Bug tracking</a></li> <li><a href="http://appdb.winehq.org/">Application Database</a></li>
I think we should leave the reference to the CVS tree page (but still add a link to the Git tree). Some people find it easier to work with CVS than Git.
-- Rob Shearman
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 08:18:43 -0500 From: EA Durbin <ead1234(a)hotmail.com>
From: Robert Shearman <rob(a)codeweavers.com> Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 12:09:42 +0100
I think we should leave the reference to the CVS tree page (but still add a link to the Git tree). Some people find it easier to work with CVS than Git.
Agreed, CVS is much easier to use in my own opinion,
But in what way it is? For example I dislike managament of env-variables at all. That's why I didn't like CVS :-p
and the packages in the ubuntu repository for git are old and don't function properly at all with the instructions listed on the page,
Well, someone should probably report this to Ubuntu folks. What is the GIT version used now in Ubuntu?
even when substituting git with http:.
Maybe this should be put into GitWine wikipage? What else instructions are inadequate on your box?
Agreed, CVS is much easier to use in my own opinion,
But in what way it is? For example I dislike managament of env-variables at all. That's why I didn't like CVS :-p
In the way that the instructions on the wine page just worked, and for familiarity purposes, git is rather new to me, and alot of linux users are familiar with CVS. The cvs tree on the website is easier to navigate than the git tree because of the way it is layed out.
and the packages in the ubuntu repository for git are old and don't function properly at all with the instructions listed on the page,
Well, someone should probably report this to Ubuntu folks. What is the GIT version used now in Ubuntu?
1.0.3 is the latest version in the ubuntu repository, even after uncommenting all the #deb lines in the apt config file and updating. When trying to run git clone git://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git wine or git clone http://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git wine it says switching to local storage disk and hangs there and does nothing.
What else instructions are inadequate on your box?
I don't know what else is inadequate on Ubuntu, I'm in the process of switching back to gentoo atm and things are still compiling.
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 11:36:31 -0500 From: EA Durbin <ead1234(a)hotmail.com>
1.0.3 is the latest version in the ubuntu repository, even after uncommenting all the #deb lines in the apt config file and updating.
When trying to run git clone git://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git wine or git clone http://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git wine it says switching to local storage disk and hangs there and does nothing.
Are you sure it does nothing? I see git v1.0.4 on my debian box at work. Indeed, it is a way less verbose than a git from my home linux box (v1.3.3), but it still works. I guess you remember that GIT repository is near to ~180 MB [*] by its size, so cloning cannot happend immediately. I just ran git-clone script directly with shell tracing enabled: $ sh -x git-clone git://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git wine It paused at these lines, v1.0.4: defaulting to local storage area ++ pwd + D=/usr/src/wine-git/temp/wine + test -d /usr/src/wine-git/temp/wine + cd /usr/src/wine-git/temp/wine + git-clone-pack git://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git v1.3.3: + D=/usr/src/wine-git/temp/wine + trap 'err=$?; cd ..; rm -r "$D"; exit $err' exit + case "$bare" in + GIT_DIR=/usr/src/wine-git/temp/wine/.git + export GIT_DIR + git-init-db + case "$bare" in + GIT_DIR=/usr/src/wine-git/temp/wine/.git + test -n '' + rm -f /usr/src/wine-git/temp/wine/.git/CLONE_HEAD + case "$local,$use_local" in + case "$repo" in + cd /usr/src/wine-git/temp/wine + case "$upload_pack" in + git-fetch-pack --all -k git://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git 0.445MB (46 kB/s) So, I guess you are observing normal behaviour. [*] ~100 MB is for repository internals (.git) and ~80 MB is occupied by the extracted source (dlls, fonts, include, ...)
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 14:45:03 +0300 (EEST) From: Saulius Krasuckas <saulius2(a)ar.fi.lt>
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 11:36:31 -0500 From: EA Durbin <ead1234(a)hotmail.com>
When trying to run git clone git://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git wine or git clone http://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git wine it says switching to local storage disk and hangs there and does nothing.
Are you sure it does nothing? I see git v1.0.4 on my debian box at work.
I forgot to add a command for monitoring directory usage in realtime. It helps me a lot in such situations: $ watch -n 1 "du -h --max-depth 2 temp/wine/" Omit "-h" option here for greater verbosity.
Robert Shearman wrote:
I think we should leave the reference to the CVS tree page (but still add a link to the Git tree). Some people find it easier to work with CVS than Git.
I think Alexandre would prefer to receive patch submissions in Git format, as they are easier to apply and waste less of his time. My changes to the website reflect that support for CVS may not last forever... Mike
Mike McCormack wrote:
Robert Shearman wrote:
I think we should leave the reference to the CVS tree page (but still add a link to the Git tree). Some people find it easier to work with CVS than Git.
I think Alexandre would prefer to receive patch submissions in Git format, as they are easier to apply and waste less of his time.
But i also guess that he likes to receive more patches than less. For the casual/new Wine patch submitter CVS is easier to use. If those submitters do more Wine work they will see the light anyway and migrate to git ;)
My changes to the website reflect that support for CVS may not last forever... Are there any plans to get rid of CVS? I would guess keeping the CVS tree sync from the git tree is low maintanance so it can be kept around "forewever".
bye michael -- Michael Stefaniuc Tel.: +49-711-96437-199 Sr. Network Engineer Fax.: +49-711-96437-111 Red Hat GmbH Email: mstefani(a)redhat.com Hauptstaetterstr. 58 http://www.redhat.de/ D-70178 Stuttgart
On Mon, Aug 21, 2006 at 11:33:28AM +0200, Michael Stefaniuc wrote:
My changes to the website reflect that support for CVS may not last forever... Are there any plans to get rid of CVS? I would guess keeping the CVS tree sync from the git tree is low maintanance so it can be kept around "forewever".
and please dont follow any plans like this until another solution is there to fetch the tree from non-linux-boxen. i tried once to build git (1.2) here on my obsd box at work, where i fetch current wine every day, and it failed. think about the children (that use no linux)! ;) -- cu
Michael Stefaniuc <mstefani(a)redhat.com> writes:
But i also guess that he likes to receive more patches than less. For the casual/new Wine patch submitter CVS is easier to use. If those submitters do more Wine work they will see the light anyway and migrate to git ;)
More patches are good, but if they are in a broken format they are not really useful. And CVS unfortunately makes it much too easy to submit broken patches, so it's not necessarily better for new submitters.
Are there any plans to get rid of CVS? I would guess keeping the CVS tree sync from the git tree is low maintanance so it can be kept around "forewever".
Yes, as long as it doesn't require any maintenance it will be kept around. But if it breaks for some reason, I'm not going to spend time fixing it. -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org
Alexandre Julliard wrote:
Michael Stefaniuc <mstefani(a)redhat.com> writes:
Are there any plans to get rid of CVS? I would guess keeping the CVS tree sync from the git tree is low maintanance so it can be kept around "forewever".
Yes, as long as it doesn't require any maintenance it will be kept around. But if it breaks for some reason, I'm not going to spend time fixing it.
If CVS goes, is there another way to see what patches have been applied to the tree? The git does not seem to do that for me and cvs.winehq.org is a fairly easy lookup. Jeff
Jeff Latimer wrote:
If CVS goes, is there another way to see what patches have been applied to the tree? The git does not seem to do that for me and cvs.winehq.org is a fairly easy lookup.
If you have a local git tree, "git whatchanged" will give you the complete commit history. There's also the GitWeb interface at: http://source.winehq.org/git/ If you like graphical interfaces, try "gitk" on your local repository. These are all described at http://wiki.winehq.org/GitWine. I expect that CVS will go away sooner or later. Git is a better way to manage Wine's source code, and we should encourage people to use it. Mike
Mike McCormack wrote:
Jeff Latimer wrote:
If CVS goes, is there another way to see what patches have been applied to the tree? The git does not seem to do that for me and cvs.winehq.org is a fairly easy lookup.
If you have a local git tree, "git whatchanged" will give you the complete commit history.
There's also the GitWeb interface at: http://source.winehq.org/git/
If you like graphical interfaces, try "gitk" on your local repository.
These are all described at http://wiki.winehq.org/GitWine.
I expect that CVS will go away sooner or later. Git is a better way to manage Wine's source code, and we should encourage people to use it.
Mike
Mike I suppose that the problem is that wrapping your mind around git and working out how to handle patches, especially as it takes time to get them accepted, revert them and manage trees etc is difficult. I don't know about other but I have had a number of perplexing and utimately complete re cloning sessions to recover from problems with creating patches and comits etc. Hence git whatschanged has been of limited value. Given my experiences, I think it is going to be quite a step to start up in the future with git. Jeff
Jeff Latimer wrote:
Mike I suppose that the problem is that wrapping your mind around git and working out how to handle patches, especially as it takes time to get them accepted, revert them and manage trees etc is difficult. I don't know about other but I have had a number of perplexing and utimately complete re cloning sessions to recover from problems with creating patches and comits etc. Hence git whatschanged has been of limited value. Given my experiences, I think it is going to be quite a step to start up in the future with git.
Git isn't CVS, and might be confusing coming from the background of using CVS. If you have problems using Git, it shouldn't be too hard to get help. We answer questions about Git on the IRC channels and wine mailing lists, and have a page dedicated to it on the Wiki. Though Git is a little more difficult that CVS, I'm still pretty sure that learning it is worth the effort. Unlike CVS, Git was designed with sending patches via email in mind, so Git makes life easier for regular contributors, and for Alexandre. In the last three months, Alexandre has averaged over 800 commits per month, which is higher than we ever had when using CVS. When we standardize on using Git to send patches, things will improve more. Mike
On Monday 21 August 2006 21:22, Jeff Latimer wrote:
Mike I suppose that the problem is that wrapping your mind around git and working out how to handle patches, especially as it takes time to get them accepted, revert them and manage trees etc is difficult.
The way git does version control is different to CVS and svn and requires some adjustment, which is why the GitWine pages on the Wiki are there - ant they cover the operations that are probably 95% or more of the time spent using git. If there's something you need to do that isn't covered there, I'm pretty sure Mike is still on #winehackers during work hours Korean time and can answer questions on the "git rebase" way of doing things (and likely a lot of other people on that channel these days), and if you have problems with the branch approach you can always email me directly. Provided you are asking something not already answered in the Wiki you'll normally get a response and the Wiki will be adjusted accordingly. -- Troy Rollo - wine(a)troy.rollo.name
Jeff Latimer wrote:
Mike I suppose that the problem is that wrapping your mind around git and working out how to handle patches, especially as it takes time to get them accepted, revert them and manage trees etc is difficult. I don't know about other but I have had a number of perplexing and utimately complete re cloning sessions to recover from problems with creating patches and comits etc. Hence git whatschanged has been of limited value. Given my experiences, I think it is going to be quite a step to start up in the future with git.
Jeff
Following on from this. I have been engaged in the git migration as of a couple of days ago. The documentation seems somewhat light on for a novice in git. I have a patch that Alexandre modified and when I get fetch and git rebase origin I am told to fix the merge problems, which I have. However after that I end up with this: [hhh(a)frank wing]$ git rebase --continue You must edit all merge conflicts and then mark them as resolved using git update-index I also have the options of git rebase --abort and git rebase --skip which I am not sure of the effect of in this or any other circumstance. My reading of git update-index man pages, wiki or web leaves me none the wiser as to what to do next. Any assistance would be appreciated. Jeff
Jeff Latimer wrote:
have. However after that I end up with this:
[hhh(a)frank wing]$ git rebase --continue You must edit all merge conflicts and then mark them as resolved using git update-index
I also have the options of git rebase --abort and git rebase --skip which I am not sure of the effect of in this or any other circumstance.
If Alexandre has applied your patch, and in the middle of a rebase, you get a conflict with the version of the patch in your tree, it's often enough to do one of: # preserve the diff in all.diff just in case git diff-index -p HEAD > all.diff patch -p1 -R < all.diff git reset git rebase --skip OR # get rid of the diff from this tree git reset --hard git rebase --skip both will skip the patch, and continue the rebase, the first one simply saves the diff just in case. If you're not sure, you can check which files are uncommitted with: git diff-index HEAD As for the rebase options, the manual page is useful: http://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-rebase.html Mike
On 8/21/06, Jeff Latimer <lats(a)yless4u.com.au> wrote:
If CVS goes, is there another way to see what patches have been applied to the tree? The git does not seem to do that for me and cvs.winehq.org is a fairly easy lookup.
Jeff
To visualize the history just do something like this. $ gitk --since="6 days ago" dlls/ And you will see all commits made to the dlls directory over the past six days. $ gitk --since="3 weeks ago" dlls/ And you will see all commits made to the dlls directory over the past three weeks. You can change the number of days or weeks to fit your needs. Tom
If CVS goes, is there another way to see what patches have been applied to the tree? The git does not seem to do that for me and cvs.winehq.org is a fairly easy lookup.
Jeff
You can view the wine-cvs(a)winehq.org over newsreader, but I still like the web interface for CVS to view APPDB code while I'm editing it in vim. I find CVS alot easier to use, and if your not going to be submitting any patches its easier to get wine from CVS than GIT.
EA Durbin wrote:
if your not going to be submitting any patches its easier to get wine from CVS than GIT.
How is it easier to do cvs -z3 -d:pserver:cvs(a)cvs.winehq.org:/home/wine co -P wine than git clone git://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git wine In both case, you just have to copy/paste the command line from the web page. Colin Pitrat (Bull Services Telco) Bull, Architect of an Open World (TM) Tél : +33 (0) 1 30 80 72 93 www.bull.com
How is it easier to do cvs -z3 -d:pserver:cvs(a)cvs.winehq.org:/home/wine co -P wine
than git clone git://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git wine
because git doesn't seem to work on my machine, and I've never had problems with the tried and trusted CVS, I'm familiar with CVS as are the majority of linux users.
* On Mon, 21 Aug 2006, EA Durbin wrote:
How is it easier to do cvs -z3 -d:pserver:cvs(a)cvs.winehq.org:/home/wine co -P wine
than git clone git://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git wine
because git doesn't seem to work on my machine,
EA, so this simply means my notes on taking a look at why your git don't work (and does it really not work) were of no effect, right?
I'm familiar with CVS as are the majority of linux users.
... and this include a minority of linux newbies :-b
"Colin Pitrat" <colin.pitrat(a)bull.net> wrote:
How is it easier to do cvs -z3 -d:pserver:cvs(a)cvs.winehq.org:/home/wine co -P wine
than git clone git://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git wine
In both case, you just have to copy/paste the command line from the web page.
Right. But if you compare the size of the download you will see huge difference. -- Dmitry.
participants (12)
-
Alexandre Julliard -
Christoph Frick -
Colin Pitrat -
Dmitry Timoshkov -
EA Durbin -
Jeff Latimer -
Michael Stefaniuc -
Mike McCormack -
Robert Shearman -
Saulius Krasuckas -
Tom Wickline -
Troy Rollo