[PD-dev] Fwd: Request for dev access

[Luke Iannini (pd)]

On 2/15/07, IOhannes m zmoelnig <zmoelnig at iem.at> wrote:
> carmen wrote:
> >> I'd also still be interested in getting us over to Subversion, if
> >> there is still a supportive group for this?  I've maintained several
> >> SVN repos now, and feel a bit more up to the task of organizing the
> >> project.
>
> there are definitely a lot of supporters for this.
> i think the main problem (were we stopped last time) was to find a
> directory layout.
> otoh, the beauty about svn is, that the directory layout can be changed...
>
> >
> > i'd be more interested in moving us over to Git, so i can stop getting these emails.
>
> why would "these" emails stop more if we were using Git than they would
> if we were using svn?
>
> personally i'd like to investigate about SVK (even though i have no
> experience with that)
I'd certainly be interested in checking out SVK.  I have been in a
net-less situation many times where it would have been nice to be able
to do a "check-in" locally before making a big change.  It is very
similar to subversion (well, it is subversion, plus more), so I don't
think there would be too much additional use overhead.

One benefit of SVN, on the other hand, is the wide choice of OS and
App integration tools, for example: TextMate and SCPlugin (as of the
recent update) integrate wonderfully with Subversion, as does
TortoiseSVN on Windows and I suppose VIM and SubCommander on Linux
(and probably others, haven't spend much time with svn clients besides
stock CLI on linux, only servers).

Finally there is the issue of converting the CVS; Tigris's CVStoSVN
has been around for quite some time and is really simple to get going
http://sam.zoy.org/writings/programming/svn2cvs.html.

I'm not as sure about the SVK solution of
http://svk.bestpractical.com/view/MirrorVCP
But maybe we can just two-step it, once to SVN, then again to SVK.

I'll grab SVK and give it an actual lookover.
<time passes>
Well, I haven't downloaded it yet, but I have done a lot of reading on
it, and the general feeling I'm getting is that it is not quite mature
enough that we should be moving to it yet... it looks like a very cool
system but I'd feel safer making the smaller step to Subversion first,
then maybe reconsidering SVK later, once everyone is comfortable
(since at that point it would be very easy to switch).


>
> > what do we need. a webpage to register repos?
>
> no. we could use either sourceforge's SVN or host our own at puredata.info.
>
> the good thing about the 1st is, that we don't have to care about
> hardware, backups and the like (even if "we" only means "me")
> the bad thing is that sourceforge is really overloaded.
> the good thing about the 2nd is, that the repository is under our full
> control. we can also use the puredata.info accounts to access the
> repository (this is already set up)
> the bad thing is, that we have to take full control over the repository.
>
On the issue of accounts, I think it would be useful to have the two
layer authentication at minimum so that those uninterested in working
with the core source could make checkins with the "basic user" account
without the worry of somehow causing trouble for the "core developer"
account.  This might be a nice compromise between dozens of accounts
and just one.

Finally, if any are interested, I'd be willing to mirror the CVS
repository on my server and convert it to Subversion just for research
and general interest purposes.  Then everyone could have a sandbox to
checkout SVN before the move is made.

> of course we could also use other hosts (but then each dev has to sign
> up at yet another website).
>
>
> mfga.sdr
> IOhannes
>
> _______________________________________________
> PD-dev mailing list
> PD-dev at iem.at
> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
>

Regards,
Luke