Why do you not make the code available under a 'source code repository'?

Post by emeraldd » Wed, Jun 17, 2015, 5:15 PM UTC

tomjen3 wrote: post #43

kazinator wrote: post #21

A source code repository lets me see what bugs you have fixed, and lets me do things like "git bisect" to discover the identity of the commit where you broke something six months ago that wasn't discovered because it's not covered by tests. Helping others find your bugs helps you. Anyone who is serious about any open source project today has a repository. Your bogus rationalizations sound like you haven't held a soft…

Git bisect is only available for git and (at least) subversion has no comparable command, so unless you are willing to force everybody to use git (and that may not be bad) you aren't guaranteed to get anything useful out of it. Heck git allows you to edit the history pretty widely, right (I have only limited experience with git myself)? So in this case he could maintain a separate upstream repository which only conta…

Post by s73v3r » Wed, Jun 17, 2015, 5:18 PM UTC

graycat wrote: post #41

My experience is that for a software development project of just a few people, for a code repository fairly obvious use of the hierarchical file system on a shared server is just fine.

Post by kazinator » Wed, Jun 17, 2015, 5:37 PM UTC

jordigh wrote: post #25

kazinator wrote: post #21

A source code repository lets me see what bugs you have fixed, and lets me do things like "git bisect" to discover the identity of the commit where you broke something six months ago that wasn't discovered because it's not covered by tests. Helping others find your bugs helps you. Anyone who is serious about any open source project today has a repository. Your bogus rationalizations sound like you haven't held a soft…

> Your bogus rationalizations sound like you haven't held a software job working with other developers in twenty-five years, if ever. Video codec people are kind of weird as developers. Consider ffmpeg and libav. They're certainly competent, just weird.

Post by mgold » Wed, Jun 17, 2015, 5:43 PM UTC

zeeed wrote: post #28

howeyc wrote: post #3

I don't see an issue with this (am I supposed to? Do we demand everyone use git or similar now?). They can give you the source however they want. On another topic, did anyone see the license section? --- If you distribute a product (whether software or hardware; whether free or for pay) that uses the LIVE555 library code, then you must - when requested by either a customer, or Live Networks, Inc. - upgrade it as soon…

> I don't see an issue with this (am I supposed to? Do we demand everyone use git or similar now?). That depends on your job. If you are a software developer, -engineer or similar, I would argue that you should. There are good arguments for version control. - divide & conquer for bugfinding - reconstruction of history - being able to revert back to an older version if/while operations require it - it allows tracking…

Post by mgold » Wed, Jun 17, 2015, 5:46 PM UTC

learnstats2 wrote: post #13

Roboprog wrote: post #11

Subclassing for versioning, eh? I remember talking to a friend in the early 90s who was doing that at the company he worked at. I was reading about SCCS at the time, and wanted to convince my management to use that, but couldn't get them away from the "directory tree per release version" method. My next job in the mid 90s used RCS, and I've never worked at a job since that didn't use some kind of version control / ar…

> How do you "undo" to yesterday when you change your mind about something??? One might argue that developer time is valuable enough to ensure that it's spent on things that won't be "undone".