Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Simple Revision Control

catb.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 179 posts

Re: Simple Revision Control

#31

Post by muyuu »

awalton wrote: post #26

I think in a strange way, this tool is actually not a terrible idea. Git is not a configuration management tool, no matter how hard people try to shoe-horn it into that role. A simpler Git designed for configuration management is indeed a good idea. Unfortunately, I think the implementation leaves a lot to be desired. For one, not including the committer is an important flaw. If you're only managing your own system's…

It's actually a good idea. People often don't bother version-controlling simple stuff because it's a hassle.

I routinely use my own rdiff/rsync scripts but this is not something you find in every system and also not something most people would use.

A barebones, simple, no-install, easy, not-necessarily-for-experienced-developers VCS is a good thing to have.

BTW it's going at 1 release per day. Heh :-)

Re: Simple Revision Control

#32

Post by jayvanguard »

GFK_of_xmaspast wrote: post #27
debacle wrote: post #18

ESR, is, if nothing else, the champion of his own relevance. I've never really been fond of his work, though he seems like a nice enough guy. But he's just another OSS hacker. Bruce Perens has accomplished far more with far less controversy and self-fluffing.

"a nice enough guy" Nope: http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=26

Yeah, I unsubscribed from his blog "Armed and Dangerous." He thinks he thinks he is smarter and more knowledgable about general topics than he really is.

It should be named "Just Enough Knowledge to be Dangerous."

Logic only gets you so far when your base of knowledge is very limited in a subject.

Re: Simple Revision Control

#33

Post by cschmidt »

kazinator wrote: post #15
SwellJoe wrote: post #8

I am not entirely sure I understand why one wouldn't use git for this role. If you don't need a remote git repository, you don't need to use one, and git will be available everywhere. Certainly many production machines will tend to have it for deployment of applications across multiple machines. What are some use cases that don't work with git (which is probably already available on the system)? And why wouldn't git…

I am not entirely sure I understand why one wouldn't use git for this role. Because, for one thing, "one" sometimes doesn't have the computer science degree and years of experience to even begin to understand Git. For many users, using Git means cutting and pasting command line recipes scoured from desperate web searches, and crossing their fingers. This does not go away when you use Git just for personal use with a…

I sometimes use git this way on local files:

    git init                       # make a local repo
    git add foo.txt                # add the file
    [edit]
    git add -u                     # add changes to commit
    git commit -m"made a change"   # check in changes
    git log                        # see commits
    git status                     # what has changed
That's really all you need to know.

Re: Simple Revision Control

#34

Post by [deleted] »

debacle wrote: post #18

ESR, is, if nothing else, the champion of his own relevance. I've never really been fond of his work, though he seems like a nice enough guy. But he's just another OSS hacker. Bruce Perens has accomplished far more with far less controversy and self-fluffing.

[deleted]

Re: Simple Revision Control

#35

Post by talideon »

[deleted] wrote: post #34
debacle wrote: post #18

ESR, is, if nothing else, the champion of his own relevance. I've never really been fond of his work, though he seems like a nice enough guy. But he's just another OSS hacker. Bruce Perens has accomplished far more with far less controversy and self-fluffing.

[deleted]

I don't think that being the maintainer of the Jargon File can be said to mean that he worked on defining the meaning of 'hacker'.

Re: Simple Revision Control

#36

Post by Karunamon »

vertex-four wrote: post #14
SwellJoe wrote: post #8

I am not entirely sure I understand why one wouldn't use git for this role. If you don't need a remote git repository, you don't need to use one, and git will be available everywhere. Certainly many production machines will tend to have it for deployment of applications across multiple machines. What are some use cases that don't work with git (which is probably already available on the system)? And why wouldn't git…

The point is managing single files, not directories. Want to version control your ~/.bashrc, for example? Or a single document? You can do that without having to move the file into its own directory in some hackish way.

How is this different from just `init`ing the repo in your home directory and only adding files you care about?

Re: Simple Revision Control

#37

Post by pothibo »

GFK_of_xmaspast wrote: post #27
debacle wrote: post #18

ESR, is, if nothing else, the champion of his own relevance. I've never really been fond of his work, though he seems like a nice enough guy. But he's just another OSS hacker. Bruce Perens has accomplished far more with far less controversy and self-fluffing.

"a nice enough guy" Nope: http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=26

Thanks for the link. He actually compares homosexual with pedophiles. I want to have absolutely nothing to do with such a degenerate.

Re: Simple Revision Control

#38

Post by sigzero »

GFK_of_xmaspast wrote: post #27
debacle wrote: post #18

ESR, is, if nothing else, the champion of his own relevance. I've never really been fond of his work, though he seems like a nice enough guy. But he's just another OSS hacker. Bruce Perens has accomplished far more with far less controversy and self-fluffing.

"a nice enough guy" Nope: http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=26

That is from 2002. Does he still hold those views?

Re: Simple Revision Control

#39

Post by muyuu »

kazinator wrote: post #12

There is already a very decent little single-user revision control system that is light-weight and well-suited for making changes to individual files. Namely: the Quilt patch management system. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quilt_%28software%29 In quilt, your revision history is a "stack" of patches which is applied to the tree. You can push and pop up and down the stack, and revise the patches (for instance, to migra…

Depends on Bash which is not popular in many platforms, builds with autoconf. My granny is not going to use Quilt.

Re: Simple Revision Control

#40

Post by jordigh »

mwfogleman wrote: post #19
hapless wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are almost certainly more experienced than ESR. He held his last technology position in the early 1990s.

Then again, ESR has assumed a role in the free software community as a VCS expert, as evidenced by his reposurgeon project and uses.

And his recent months of work on migrating Emacs from bzr to git.
Post reply on HN