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

SDL Moves to GitHub

discourse.libsdl.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 270 posts

Re: SDL Moves to GitHub

#31

Post by mrpippy »

qbasic_forever wrote: post #10
talhah wrote: post #3

I've never heard of mercurial until this post, I've been using git for version control and it does the job really well. To those who use mercurial over git, why?

Git didn't exist until Linus Torvalds sat down and hacked it out in a few weeks during 2005. I remember using SDL back in '99 to play with game development on Windows 98. So the short answer is, git wasn't even an idea in its creators head when SDL was around and thriving. IMHO when you see a design decision that seems odd to you, it's a good opportunity to investigate the entire context around that design, rather th…

SDL didn't use Mercurial until 2010. They used Subversion from 2006-2010 [1], and CVS before that [2]. A project on its 4th version control system!

[1]: http://forums.libsdl.org/viewtopic.php?t=6047 [2]: https://discourse.libsdl.org/t/sdl-in-subversion/13289

Re: SDL Moves to GitHub

#32

Post by ufo »

folkrav wrote: post #9
jmercouris wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A much better UI. Git won because of the influence of the Linux kernel developers, that's all.

> A much better UI Curious as how it's "better". I have in all honestly only ever used git.

One thing I prefer about Mercurial is that it doesn't have a separate staging area. To create a new commit in git you need to run `git add` followed by `git commit`. In Mercurial it's just `hg commit`. Furthermore, if you want to look at the diff in git sometimes it's `git diff` and sometimes you need to run `git diff --cached`.

Now, I'm sure there are antsy git users in this forum ready to reply about how great the staging area is because of `git add -p`. I would note that you can also do those things in Hg if you want. For example, the `shelve` command in Hg is analogous to `git stash -p`. If you want to commit only part of the changes you can shelve away the things that you don't want to commit for now. One thing I like about this workflow compared to the staging area is that if you run your test suite, the code that is being tested in your working directory is the same one that will be commited.

Re: SDL Moves to GitHub

#33

Post by lifthrasiir »

formerly_proven wrote: post #13
jmercouris wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A much better UI. Git won because of the influence of the Linux kernel developers, that's all.

Git is and always was very fast. Hg used to be much much slower, and still is.

Both were still very faster than the mainstream solution at the time that is Subversion. I don't think Git could achieve the domination comparable to today without Github for that reason.

Re: SDL Moves to GitHub

#34

Post by acdha »

jmercouris wrote: post #4
talhah wrote: post #3

I've never heard of mercurial until this post, I've been using git for version control and it does the job really well. To those who use mercurial over git, why?

A much better UI. Git won because of the influence of the Linux kernel developers, that's all.

Kind of — I started using Mercurial before using Git and found a number of things which were easier or only possible using Git. Using some of the plugins for things like rebase were the only time I've ever lost data in a version control system.

By the time they had addressed some of those gaps, almost all of the projects I used had moved to GitHub, which seemed to be far more of a driver than Linux.

Re: SDL Moves to GitHub

#35

Post by pdw »

dialamac wrote: post #15
jmercouris wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A much better UI. Git won because of the influence of the Linux kernel developers, that's all.

I mean git is wildly popular because of GitHub, and probably that was something to do with it in the Rails community... a community that if anything is culturally the opposite of the kernel dev community (or at least very different). I don’t think any kernel dev influence had to do with it, even though it’s often stated as a fact.

No, even at the time of GitHub's founding Git was already the clear winner. Think about it, why did GitHub feel safe launching with only Git support, while its competitors (Google Code, Bitbucket, SourceForge) had support for multiple VCSs?

Re: SDL Moves to GitHub

#36

Post by acdha »

ufo wrote: post #32
folkrav wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A much better UI Curious as how it's "better". I have in all honestly only ever used git.

One thing I prefer about Mercurial is that it doesn't have a separate staging area. To create a new commit in git you need to run `git add` followed by `git commit`. In Mercurial it's just `hg commit`. Furthermore, if you want to look at the diff in git sometimes it's `git diff` and sometimes you need to run `git diff --cached`. Now, I'm sure there are antsy git users in this forum ready to reply about how great the…

> To create a new commit in git you need to run `git add` followed by `git commit`.

Or `git commit -a` — and if you're making commits that frequently it'll be in your shell history anyway.

Re: SDL Moves to GitHub

#37

Post by rileymat2 »

talhah wrote: post #3

I've never heard of mercurial until this post, I've been using git for version control and it does the job really well. To those who use mercurial over git, why?

I had tried both in thier infancy, and honestly prefered mercurial by quite a bit. But git had the momentum.

One thing I liked, that most do not is they had both git style branches in the form of tags, but mercurial had "real" branches.

Re: SDL Moves to GitHub

#38

Post by eikenberry »

jmercouris wrote: post #4
talhah wrote: post #3

I've never heard of mercurial until this post, I've been using git for version control and it does the job really well. To those who use mercurial over git, why?

A much better UI. Git won because of the influence of the Linux kernel developers, that's all.

If I remember correctly Mercurial also made some dubious decisions early on (which they later reversed) that hurt adoption, like no in-repo branches and no ability to change history.

Re: SDL Moves to GitHub

#39

Post by h_anna_h »

This is sad. It is as if we are going backwards, from an open source solution they decided to move to a closed ecosystem. They could at least use gitlab instead...

Re: SDL Moves to GitHub

#40

Post by johannes1234321 »

jmercouris wrote: post #4
talhah wrote: post #3

I've never heard of mercurial until this post, I've been using git for version control and it does the job really well. To those who use mercurial over git, why?

A much better UI. Git won because of the influence of the Linux kernel developers, that's all.

Not only that, but GitHub came early and made the hosting easy. There was no similar offering for hg that early on.
Post reply on HN