 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
hi,
Cousin Ricky <ric### [at] yahoo com> wrote:
> On 2021-08-18 3:06 AM (-4), jr wrote:
> >
> > not sure if this describes you(r situation), from the fossil docs: "ii. Single
> > developer with multiple subprojects"
> >
> > {...}
>
> That doesn't tell me much, nor does it seem intended to sell Fossil over
> Git.
sell? no. as the page says, any scm is better than none, and you get enough
overview to decide whether it's worth your while to find out more.
btw, there _is_ a page detailing how move data between those s/wares:
<https://www.fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/inout.wiki>
> It should be evident that I have no feel whatsoever for what makes a
> good or a bad SCM/VCS service (other than whether they push junkware on
> your users).
no "good or bad". just suits yr way of working, or does not.
> But I've already made an announcement in p.o-c, so you
> might say that I am "committed" to GitHub. And given my historical
> difficulties trying to grok such systems, I feel safer with what others
> are doing.
and I think that a pretty good reason, knowing you can find 'git' users here, in
case of .. difficulty.
regards, jr.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 20 Aug 2021 12:41:10 +1000, Chris Cason wrote:
> On 20/08/2021 11:45, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> (But yes, Microsoft does now own Github)
>
> Which is a good thing, in a way. While I'm not a great fan of Microsoft,
> they do seem to be keeping their fingers out of interfering with github,
> which makes perfect sense when you think of it.
Yeah, they do seem to have done that. I've also never been a big fan of
Microsoft (though I now live in the Seattle area, and I know a lot of
people who used to work there, and a few, I think, who still do). The
company's changed a lot since Ballmer left. He was a big part of the
last vestiges of Gates' time there.
> Some of us will remember the time that SourceForge was the place for
> open-source projects to host public repositories, and will also know
> what happened when SF got sold to someone who didn't really care about
> software but just wanted to make a quick buck regardless of the damage
> done.
>
> [...]
>
> See
> https://www.howtogeek.com/218764/warning-don%E2%80%99t-download-
software-from-sourceforge-if-you-can-help-it/
> if you're interested in more background on what happened to SF.
Oh, yes, I had forgotten about that. Before SourceForge, it was
freshmeat.net, but that was more an aggregator than a host for the
software, as I recall.
> Now someone may wonder how this relates to a discussion about GitHub and
> its ownership, and my answer is that it relates a *lot*. GitHub isn't
> unique; it's not created or run by the makers of Git. it's just a
> open-source software hosting site - like SourceForge is/was.
>
> Microsoft bought it because they saw it as a good investment as it had
> become a popular destination for OSS projects and their own OSS host
> (CodePlex) wasn't doing nearly as well (and in fact they since shut it
> down).
>
> GitHub (and sites like it) lives and breathes on its *reputation*. While
> it has some neat features (like build automation) the basic technology
> (Git) is portable and as such there's not a lot preventing a project
> just moving somewhere else. Microsoft are well aware of that fact and
> would have to be insane to do anything that would jeopardize their $7bn
> investment in GitHub as almost all of that value is tied up in 'good
> will'.
>
> Just as importantly they're *also* so cashed up they they are unlikely
> to ever say "we need a few extra dollars, let's sell GitHub" - meaning
> GH is unlikely to ever end up in the hands of anyone who wants to make a
> quick buck regardless of the damage done to the reputation of the site
> (which is what happened to SourceForge).
One friend who used to work at Microsoft described them years ago as
"circling the drain - but they have a lot of money, so it's going to take
a long time for them to disappear" (words to that effect). But I think
Nadela has embraced open source a lot more (Microsoft has historically
contributed a fair amount to the Linux Kernel, actually). Back in the
day when Novell bought Ximian (who created the open-source Mono project -
an OSS implementation of .NET), there was a lot of concern about
Microsoft suing Novell over intellectual property around .NET (I was
there - worked for Novell for about 8 years, starting right before they
acquired SUSE in 2003, and leaving when Attachmate bought them in 2011).
Now Miguel de Icaza is on the board of the .NET foundation, and Nat
Friedman is the CEO of Github (so he works for Microsoft).
Jim
--
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>
> My favorite tool of choice is Atlassian Sourcetree (from the folks
> behind BitBucket, an alternative to GitHub), which does seem to support
> both submodules and subtrees (you can add a new submodule or subtree
> from the GUI).
Do they have a version for GNU/Linux? I can't find one on their website.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Cousin Ricky" <rickysttATyahooDOTcom> wrote:
>
> Do they have a version for GNU/Linux? I can't find one on their website.
They don't, the only supported systems are Windows and Mac.
You might have a look at Git Extensions, it should run on GNU/Linux with mono:
https://gitextensions.github.io/
It also has a nice interface (even if the SourceTree one is better).
I am using it on Windows, I have abandoned SourceTree as it used to become
extremely slow after some upgrade cycles, and Git Extensions functionality is
more than enough for my use.
Submodules are supported; subtrees, however, are not.
By the way, I'm back here after very very long time and it's very nice to see
POV-Ray progress and the new beta!
Thank you all for the efforts put in this project!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 08 Sep 2021 23:38:16 -0400, Cousin Ricky wrote:
> clipka <ano### [at] anonymousorg> wrote:
>>
>> My favorite tool of choice is Atlassian Sourcetree (from the folks
>> behind BitBucket, an alternative to GitHub), which does seem to support
>> both submodules and subtrees (you can add a new submodule or subtree
>> from the GUI).
>
> Do they have a version for GNU/Linux? I can't find one on their
> website.
Sadly, they do not.
--
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2021-08-20-2021 5:31 AM, Mr wrote:
>
> Nice to see what people use. I had picked git Cola so far. because of one (LX)QT
> based linux Machine
Git-Cola is in my repositories, so I'll take a look at that, when (if?)
I can get my new computer stabilized.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
