Why SQLite does not use Git (2018) • Hacker News Board

Re: Why SQLite does not use Git (2018)

#141

Post by inferiorhuman » Sun, Jul 23, 2023, 5:05 AM UTC

paulryanrogers wrote: post #125

inferiorhuman wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the one hand I'm inclined to agree about monoculture, on the other I've worked at a company where one employee dictated that we use bzr. Basically everything was an order of magnitude more difficult through minimal fault of bzr. None of the third party tooling worked with bzr, or if something did have bzr support it was dropped ages ago. It's kind of the same situation with Github. The pain in moving away from it…

Having been that person (albeit before Git was the one true way), I'm sorry. But seemed so nice and had solid externals and sparse checkouts back in the day. And as bad as it got for us, it still felt easier to pick up and use than early Git.

Sure, and I was that person with the svn -> git migration at a different gig. Ideally our behavior matures over time.

For me, at least, two things eventually made git really manageable: github and the O'Reilly book. After those git was a no brainer. Even with git becoming the de facto standard, if you don't need the integrations it's not so unreasonable to use something else (altho bzr's been discontinued).

Re: Why SQLite does not use Git (2018)

#142

Post by friend_and_foe » Sun, Jul 23, 2023, 5:13 AM UTC

I read this years ago, and it really showed me the light. I've used fossil and run it on my own server and it is a dream to work with. I hate working with git, but I do it reluctantly. I'd rather use fossil any day.

Re: Why SQLite does not use Git (2018)

#143

Post by sixthDot » Sun, Jul 23, 2023, 5:20 AM UTC

> The closest I have found is the network, which is slow to render (unless it is already cached), does not offer nearly as much details

$ gitk --all

not mobile however

Re: Why SQLite does not use Git (2018)

#144

Post by somat » Sun, Jul 23, 2023, 5:29 AM UTC

zeroimpl wrote: post #100

Seems like a textbook example of NIH to me. By the time you understand git well enough to design a good replacement, you’re bound to be an expert and ought to appreciate more the design of git. If you don’t like the lack of a good GUI or web application, you can just build one that works the way you want and still works with git.

I always refer to this as stockholm syndrome.

Re: Why SQLite does not use Git (2018)

#145

Post by madsmith » Sun, Jul 23, 2023, 5:31 AM UTC

backendanon wrote: post #123

qbasic_forever wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, which is why git is a pain in the butt to install and you have to rely on your OS packages (which includes all the kitchen sink stuff) or a GUI installer with all the necessary dependencies vs. Fossil which is just download executable and done.

git...is difficult to install? What's difficult about apt-get install git?

I’ve been trying to install git on the hypervisor of my smartOS install intermittently for a year. I run into system package conflicts or key signing errors and then I give up and switch to a zone that isn’t so borked with package issues.

Then I go lament in the corner that I really should be serious about migrating this to 200TB home lab to anything else and then realize that the 200TB is not something easily backed up in the case FreeBSD or TrueNAS doesn’t understand my Zpool versions and all of those zones I created will need to be rebuilt as jails…

And my lamentations turn to tears. All because I wanted to just checkout some random project.

Re: Why SQLite does not use Git (2018)

#146

Post by ylyn » Sun, Jul 23, 2023, 5:42 AM UTC

forrestthewoods wrote: post #88

kstrauser wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or on a plane. It’s nice to have 100% of its functionality when you have 0% of your usual connectivity. Branches, commits, merges, all from the local file system? Yes, please. There’s a reason we moved off centralized VCS en masse.

Sorry, but you’re completely and objectively wrong. This is a huge misnomer. Distributed and “offline support” are fully orthogonal features. Distributed means every user has a full copy of the entire repo including full history. This is a radical and unnecessary limitation on the scope and size of source control. You can have full support for branching, commits, and merges without a fully distributed repo. There are…

You can't really have branches, commits and merges _while offline_ without a distributed repository.

Let me add to that: history and blame too.

Re: Why SQLite does not use Git (2018)

#147

Post by mrighele » Sun, Jul 23, 2023, 5:45 AM UTC

backendanon wrote: post #123

qbasic_forever wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, which is why git is a pain in the butt to install and you have to rely on your OS packages (which includes all the kitchen sink stuff) or a GUI installer with all the necessary dependencies vs. Fossil which is just download executable and done.

git...is difficult to install? What's difficult about apt-get install git?

> you have to rely on your OS packages (which includes all the kitchen sink stuff)

Re: Why SQLite does not use Git (2018)

#148

Post by pyeri » Sun, Jul 23, 2023, 5:46 AM UTC

ohthatsnotright wrote: post #21

I'm glad Fossil works for them, but this line is bothered me: > In contrast, Fossil is a single standalone binary which is installed by putting it on $PATH. That one binary contains all the functionality of core Git and also GitHub and/or GitLab. It manages a community server with wiki, bug tracking, and forums, provides packaged downloads for consumers, login managements, and so forth, with no extra software require…

The "do one thing and do it well" approach died the day when systemd became a super hit.

Re: Why SQLite does not use Git (2018)

#149

Post by School-Cotton » Sun, Jul 23, 2023, 5:46 AM UTC

avikalp wrote: post #132

backendanon wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

git...is difficult to install? What's difficult about apt-get install git?

These is exactly what my first thought was! Installing open-ssh and git is kind of my first activity on a new computer. But I believe they are talking about setting up a git server. The thing that we rely on GitHub/GitLab/Bitbucket for. Richard counts them as an added dependency. (I mean, he is not wrong in being worried about that. You are basically giving your all your code to a company. Which does not matter for o…

What is a “git server”? There’s no distinction between client and server in git; you can “git pull” from any machine with the normal “git” program installed that you have SSH access to.

Re: Why SQLite does not use Git (2018)

#150

Post by pkulak » Sun, Jul 23, 2023, 5:49 AM UTC

kasperset wrote: post #106

I saw this video few days ago which describes some of the alternative to Git and of course Fossil is one of them. I have used Fossil in some projects and found to be ok. I found Pijul https://pijul.org/ described in this talk to be very interesting. It was discussed on HN before. Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4KktA_jbOE

Pijul has always fascinated me. It’s like the holy grail of version control. But for my personal projects, I develop in a straight line anyway, and I’m not in control of what’s used at work, so I’ve never really used it.