The design roots of Subversion can be traced back to the first very simplistic attempts at version control, such as SCCS and RCS. The design of it has steamrolled on from the 70’s with little consideration of stable internet development methods practiced since at least the mid-eighties. The claim is made that Subversion “just fixes CVS”. And while Subversion is generally more robust and versatile than CVS, some still see it as a step backwards.
It seems that a lot of sites have cropped up that offer free Git hosting; First there was repo by Petr Baudis of cogito fame. A service running from Prague, based on a few simple CGIs, themselves published. Then I think gitorious came along, and also GitHub - both Ruby implementations and some adding services I have a hunch that people are writing these things as they cotton on to the benefits of distributed version control, and none of the centralised based sites out there (eg, SourceForge, etc) were really coming to the table quickly enough.
Ok, so I wrote a review (see my other post Why are you still using Subversion) of Subversion which bordered on ranting. I even advertised it on #git, but relatively few people marked it as “useful”. While it was sitting on “3 of 8 found this useful”, I was going to delete it, but revisiting it, I found that it’s been consistently getting marked as “useful” by people. It’s now sitting on “7 of 13”.
(with apologies to mnftiu) Ok, so I’ve been working on this program to convert the Perl history from Perforce, with the view to tack it on top of the previous conversion I worked on. Today, I had my first successful run that includes converting the integration data. It’s a huge milestone for this project - which I initially agreed with Nicholas Clark to undertake way way back in August 2006 over a pint on the banks of the river Thames.
During the Perl history conversion, I have found there are very few patches from the p5p archives which I have found I couldn’t apply. However, sometimes a pumpking will have integrated a patch which was posted relative to an older version of Perl. How am I representing that? The patch “Forbid ++ and – on readonly values” was relative to 5.003_08, and would not cleanly apply to any closer version than that.
People keep saying things like this: I’ve found Apache/mod_perl to satisfy all of my webdev environment requirements But your configuration was fragile, your scripts all ran as the same user code, you couldn’t debug it, and you used every little gimmicky feature and now nobody can understand how the damned thing fits together. We managed to scale MySQL to run massive sites like LiveJournal But you threw away the database and re-wrote the critical parts yourself, instead of using a database that scales by virtue of implementing the important features you need to scale.
#main { margin: 1em; color: #000; background-color: #fff; font-family: FreeSerif, serif; font-size: 12pt; } #main tt, #main pre { font-family: Bitstream Vera Sans Mono, Andale Mono, Consolas, monospace; font-size: 11pt; clear: both; } #main h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6 { font-family: FreeSans, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; } #main .title, .title a { font-weight: bold; font-size: 16pt; color: #777; margin: 0 auto 0 auto; } #main h1 { font-size: 18pt; } #main h2 { font-size: 16pt; border-bottom: 2px solid maroon; } #main h3 { font-size: 14pt; } #main h4, #main h5, #main h6 { font-size: 13pt; font-style: italic; } #main dl { margin-left: 1em; } #main dl dd { padding-top: 0.
Here’s a very late baacamp report. Colin Jackson told the story of Internet New Zealand. A group of concerned people got together, formed a co-operative. I’m not sure of the exact type of legal entity they used, but it involved a constitution, and their consititution was democratic and non-commercial. They even used its democratic provisions once and got sufficient members to oust a bad president. They used this charitably chartered enterprise to get control over the .