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

GitHub is down

status.github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 175 posts

Re: GitHub is down

#161

Post by richieadler »

popmystack wrote: post #159
CMay wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, fossil is all I use. It's so clean, tiny and self contained with no install or bloat. I've always been in love with software written that way. It makes me look at things like git as just a product of engineers that can get the job done, but don't know what it means to write good software or use imagination. Being fair, fossil performance on giant scale projects might not compare quite as well against git or pro…

> but don't know what it means to write good software or use imagination. You can't do patches. You can't rebase. You can't rename files. Tell me all about this good software and imagination you speak of?

> You can't do patches.

You can create bundles and submit them for approval. Very similar.

> You can't rebase.

You have alternatives. The work philosophy is different, though.

> You can't rename files.

False.

Re: GitHub is down

#162

Post by gkya »

cytzol wrote: post #134
gkya wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Fossil tracks issues (tickets), documentation, and wiki pages at the same level as it tracks code, so when you clone a Fossil repo, everything gets downloaded to your local computer. Issue tracking and wikis are not a version control problem. Sure, their data can be version controlled. And documentation has been version controlled since Sccs, why would it require special care?

> why would it require special care? It doesn't, really, but it's in the same place as the code and everything else (this is what I meant as being "on the same level"). You don't need to clone the code and then clone the tickets, for instance. When you run "fossil timeline" on your local machine, you'll see entries for tickets being closed and wiki pages being updated interspersed among the actual code commits. This…

No, unfortunately. How is this different to and / or better than having a "wiki/" subfolder, and, e.g. an Org-mode file (need not be org-mode, even a plain text file is o.k., and there are wiki systems and todo managers that use plain text) for issues on the project root? I can easily "git/hg/cvs log project.org" to see the history. And the format is not tied to the VCS software, so, if I switch to sth. else, it's still perfectly usable.

An basic example of an org file for tracking issues:

  #+title: Project issue tracker
  #+description: descr...
  #+todo: OPEN(o!) | CLOSED (c@)
  
  This is the issue tracker for Project.  In order to add a
  new issue, add it to the top of the entries as a plain org
  entry, then hit =C-c C-t o= to mark it as open.  In order
  to close an issue, on it's headline, hit =C-c C-t C=,
  this will prompt for a closing comment, see the buffer that
  pops up for instructions.
  
  Common tags: docs, features, bugs, security, ideas
  
  * CLOSED Write README. :docs:bookkeeping:
  - State "CLOSED"     from "OPEN"       [2016-03-22 Tue 02:16] \\
    Written.
  - State "OPEN"       from              [2016-03-18 Fri 22:33]
  * OPEN Implement new features :features:
  - State "OPEN"       from              [2016-01-27 Çrş 23:35]

Re: GitHub is down

#163

Post by popmystack »

richieadler wrote: post #161
popmystack wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but don't know what it means to write good software or use imagination. You can't do patches. You can't rebase. You can't rename files. Tell me all about this good software and imagination you speak of?

> You can't do patches. You can create bundles and submit them for approval. Very similar. > You can't rebase. You have alternatives. The work philosophy is different, though. > You can't rename files. False.

>You can create bundles and submit them for approval. Very similar.

Bundles do not have anywhere near the same flexibility and nuanced capacity that patches do.

>The work philosophy is different, though.

That's an apology if I've ever seen one. Again, not the same.

>False.

Rename a file. Then try to merge. Tell me what happens.

Re: GitHub is down

#165

Post by CMay »

popmystack wrote: post #159
CMay wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, fossil is all I use. It's so clean, tiny and self contained with no install or bloat. I've always been in love with software written that way. It makes me look at things like git as just a product of engineers that can get the job done, but don't know what it means to write good software or use imagination. Being fair, fossil performance on giant scale projects might not compare quite as well against git or pro…

> but don't know what it means to write good software or use imagination. You can't do patches. You can't rebase. You can't rename files. Tell me all about this good software and imagination you speak of?

Rename: https://www.fossil-scm.org/xfer/help/rename - Merge only merges content, but the content does get updated between renamed files. Also note that while rename and mv work similarly, only mv can be used with --hard to also rename the actual file on the drive. If you know of an issue with renaming, you should report it on the bug tracker.

Patches: You can select any 2 commits and create a patch between them ( http://fossil-scm.org/xfer/vpatch?from=cbda43e71bda52f0&to=e... ). If you want to apply the patch, you can just use patch. Whether patch itself should be integrated directly into fossil is I guess something people can argue over. I don't use patches often, but haven't had issues with them.

Rebase: This is what Hipp has to say - http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.fossil...

These things may not be exactly how you prefer them, but you're misinterpreting my point about good software and imagination. Almost no software in existence is perfect for everyone in every scenario, but that doesn't also mean that no software is good.

Re: GitHub is down

#166

Post by kevinmgranger »

cytzol wrote: post #52
kchoudhu wrote: post #6

If only we had a version control system that didn't rely on a central hub...

We do, it's called Fossil! http://fossil-scm.org/ Fossil tracks issues (tickets), documentation, and wiki pages at the same level as it tracks code, so when you clone a Fossil repo, everything gets downloaded to your local computer. You can then respond to tickets and perform repo maintenance offline, syncing everything to the server when you're back up. Edit: A few weeks ago I got a job a one-hour train ride away. I…

For those wanting to stick with Git, the concept extends to Fedora's Pagure: https://fedoramagazine.org/pagure-diy-git-project-hosting/

Granted, the documentation needs work. But all issues and docs are exposed as git repos.

Re: GitHub is down

#167

Post by cytzol »

joshschreuder wrote: post #146
cytzol wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We do, it's called Fossil! http://fossil-scm.org/ Fossil tracks issues (tickets), documentation, and wiki pages at the same level as it tracks code, so when you clone a Fossil repo, everything gets downloaded to your local computer. You can then respond to tickets and perform repo maintenance offline, syncing everything to the server when you're back up. Edit: A few weeks ago I got a job a one-hour train ride away. I…

Is it easy to fix merge conflicts on something like an issue?

Argh, I don’t actually know, and I probably should. I’ll ask on the mailing list and reply with what I find out.

Re: GitHub is down

#168

Post by cjbprime »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #100
maze-le wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did someone say GitTorrent...? https://github.com/cjb/GitTorrent

Looks exactly like what's needed. Is it safe enough though? I.e. can I rely on getting a non-maliciously-modified repo when I ask for particular SHA1? Also: sudo npm install --global gittorrent Cool! It automatically installs a local copy of half of GitHub! ;).

> I.e. can I rely on getting a non-maliciously-modified repo when I ask for particular SHA1?

Someone could serve you a maliciously-modified repo, but Git itself would then reject those objects, since they won't lead to the SHA1 that Git knows that it's looking for -- you would keep trying other peers until someone gave you bits that match the correct SHA1.

Re: GitHub is down

#169

Post by cytzol »

gkya wrote: post #162
cytzol wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> why would it require special care? It doesn't, really, but it's in the same place as the code and everything else (this is what I meant as being "on the same level"). You don't need to clone the code and then clone the tickets, for instance. When you run "fossil timeline" on your local machine, you'll see entries for tickets being closed and wiki pages being updated interspersed among the actual code commits. This…

No, unfortunately. How is this different to and / or better than having a "wiki/" subfolder, and, e.g. an Org-mode file (need not be org-mode, even a plain text file is o.k., and there are wiki systems and todo managers that use plain text) for issues on the project root? I can easily "git/hg/cvs log project.org" to see the history. And the format is not tied to the VCS software, so, if I switch to sth. else, it's st…

Ah, I see. In that case, you're right, it's not: if you track issues and docs like like in the same way as you track source files, then functionality-wise they're no different.

The differences that remain are purely in the interface. For example, although they're synced the same way, VCSes tend to display issues differently than source; it's easier to filter out issue changes from the timeline, and harder to accidentally delete other people’s comments. It also makes it possible for people who aren't actual members of your project to raise and comment on the issues, which wouldn't usually be possible (unless your VCS can manage permissions for each file).

One particular use case of yours that Fossil does support is the ability to have a "wiki/" subfolder and have the web interface automatically format and display the pages inside, so you can link to them more easily if you're using the HTTP server for hosting. I think I use this feature more than the built-in wiki because it’s possible to version the docs along with the source, ensuring they never go out of sync.

Re: GitHub is down

#170

Post by popmystack »

CMay wrote: post #165
popmystack wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but don't know what it means to write good software or use imagination. You can't do patches. You can't rebase. You can't rename files. Tell me all about this good software and imagination you speak of?

Rename: https://www.fossil-scm.org/xfer/help/rename - Merge only merges content, but the content does get updated between renamed files. Also note that while rename and mv work similarly, only mv can be used with --hard to also rename the actual file on the drive. If you know of an issue with renaming, you should report it on the bug tracker. Patches: You can select any 2 commits and create a patch between them ( htt…

Fossil leaves me with no reason to use it. What it can do, Git and Mercurial can do better. Saying that no software fits the use case for everyone, everywhere is completely irrelevant. Other software not fitting into every mold completely, while fossil doesn't really bring anything to the table to cover what other solutions don't, doesn't really justify its existence as a solution in any way.
Post reply on HN