X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Message-ID: <569AA936.1000305@iee.org> Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2016 20:33:58 +0000 From: "M. J. Everitt (m DOT j DOT everitt AT iee DOT org) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Subject: Re: [geda-user] LP1532611 (modular fie formats) fixes References: <56982D5A DOT 1020706 AT prochac DOT sk> <569A2DAC DOT 9070200 AT prochac DOT sk> <569A3280 DOT 3030704 AT iee DOT org> <201601161912 DOT u0GJC8Fs025943 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <569A9AD3 DOT 9060306 AT iee DOT org> <201601162011 DOT u0GKBHYG028053 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> In-Reply-To: <201601162011.u0GKBHYG028053@envy.delorie.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:sEGah2sd+NMoqT1wGvetZ88gFzOh/aNHRPtefqk4YEPkr9fwM61 Z3J+0pAQWc8+KyMZtm8KzC52OgJeW8j8+K7b+v2tOLJKY35XMXiPXqvoZyy/g6iQMV75MSp iq6k5rnufFAZ1VCS9xf66lTxp6InrhFbDLXlsEdB+HtsaHdc1+UzF8QcvWfEuQtLzNIc1ZW 5Apt5+dRL6Z4QneliHIig== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:45x38LpiFcI=:0j1ruvwVrP4dqm1ln1hF+R o7XYfP9Shyo4kDuzSYHuPh7LhFRuryKFuBGwOy/7MjG9dmGSJnLKqCHFOgHCJS2F3erZHfmGL 7mh1kUWpofF4KvA/qga2zY8Sn96SBuCYQmAsJNVqtR++XeLWhvDh56+ig2EEJPs3Z/sx/JPMk C8UaEmAe1lwNtjgoLlTL1WDY6hQ1awryQfT8vNIKEqK9JG0MV59+tKANel665YvHqOPGEMNeE BC2W4gxmMiaSx4ENR9C9LoWMBy1TkM1aiLwi2fK6YCwUJydQ0wBWoGp3nW28DTmsZgjthCEpo 3jsAr20H9dUXkPwoH06rsJFrWOXp+9b/VB+NGCxIPZCb4zrLMQhPhraFUc3BeJ2Al1fWyR752 SZir0Jju6t0BhsnHP+etMzOWf/uNun/ct+bJduknAzbvQjks0tkiBq3Lt74a9oMCnoF9hJWS0 ueNxVe5n4M4FSIDRdFaM2oJcoWxVmXVEQYSMs4TIncvAASwhubwnF8hQFu90E4LlxA5u1h7aZ zRxjxwYlSR+TN7sktDMe4pJS0YoR8UBhhDPnnNMxzaI1m2zDgdLCNVzj18Bx9CIzTAX+N6fiH U/znn14GgD0AvaWLixUG1oIIdUxbcqcYRtn0Mkp86yGpoaye6wu3yjDB6JRvm4f4jJi3jo6zr ISWAEP181yTatK16l5hqsHYxFWBa05J7CwyxNxtIgFlQtZTnPeFANskS1GrRhbA9wrGtjAcDz rcn19d8Q2X4VuOWb Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com On 16/01/16 20:11, DJ Delorie wrote: >> But from where I'm sitting/standing .. where IS that one spot? > Um, the master repo... Type "git branch -a" or "gitk --all" to see > all the activity, or visit: > > http://git.geda-project.org/pcb/ > >> The idea is not to create a platform for people to rail against one >> another, its to see what other people are working on, > Hiding your changes in a private repo on someone else's computer > doesn't help others see what you're working on. Effective > communication does. We provide various means of communicating, from > playing in the main repo where others can track your activites, to > mailing lists, bug trackers, and IRC. Still, it's up to you (the > developer) to ensure your work doesn't get lost, regardless of how you > store it. > >> Also, its transparent how to merge A's work with B and C and so >> forth .. at least in my eyes .. > Merging emailed patches with git has always been a sore spot for me. > I'd rather have patches in one repo where they're easy to > click-n-merge. Patches and email is very last century .. we're all not-quite point-click .. but this is where gitk and web interfaces really make the job so much easier. Pull requests really are just an extension of that .. where a developer can say "hey, done this, wanna take a look" .. that way the onus is moved from developer to integrator .. kinda thing. I will clone the central repo, but for me as a newcomer, its very hard to see who's working on what where. And onwards from that .. what's literally someone's playground branch, and what's serious development code. >> both git and github, but I can really see the power of it, and its >> interface, although no reason why the command-line git tools don't >> complement it either. > I've been struggling with git for a long time now, and the main > problem I have is that there are TOO MANY ways to do any one task. > It's like having a box of legos - you can build anything, but building > anything is hard because you always have to start from scratch. I'd > rather have a few tools that limit people to well-understood paths, so > that managing patches is more about the patch and less about the > managing. > > If there are 9 different ways to do something in git, you only have to > learn one - but I have to learn all 9 because I have to be able to > manage contributions from 9 different people who have learned 9 > different ways of doing things. > >> As it's free to use, and I have nothing to hide, this would >> obviously be my platform of choice (either GH or bitbucket I've >> used) for my code development (and already is in a couple of cases). > Heck, I ran all of DJGPP for 20 years with just CVS. Flexibility is > not always a benefit. Well, I've come from a subversion -> Mercurial migration, and apart from svn being far too limiting, I've got used to the Hg workflow. Although, I've hit edge cases where I make a mistake, and undoing/repairing the problem is much more than Hg can handle. I'm learning git, and yes, like many things (perl for example) its a toolkit .. it depends a lot how you use it. As I'm inducted into the gentoo 'fold' there is a strict procedure for contributors to follow, including a script-based QA procedure (it checks a template for a set of basic rules) then its up to the authority to review, comment and merge if they see fit. There is no reason why a similar 'procedure' (needn't be totally draconian) couldn't be put together for geda/pcb development, surely?! My intention is not to try to break/change/fix what is set up already .. just suggest some ways to lubricate the cogs of the machine. Clearly there are some road-block issues, and only a collective will to change them will ever address those.