Re: [Squeak-VMdev] SourceForge or SqueakForge?

[<gor...@bl...>]

Hi fellow Squeakers! (good mood today :))

le...@cc... wrote:
> I've been using subversion for a while now (over a year) and now I
> always choose it over CVS when possible.  Some nice features are:
[SNIP of examples]
> Overall, my experience suggests that the summary given by others is
> correct: it is CVS with some of the annoying parts cleaned up.

Yes, I haven't used it myself but I agree - this is what it looks like
from everything I have read.

> As for accessing from Squeak, I expect that svn is harder to implement
> directly; CVS operates on one file at a time, while svn operations can
> be more complicated.

Eh... well, the main difference might be (given that I haven't looked at
Svn) that the client part of CVS is somewhat simple to implement (the
pserver protocol) because it is just a slave-mode-kinda-thing, all the
logic is on the server side. So the protocol is almost a trivial
remote-filesystem-protocol with some CVS-state-management thrown in. I
implemented it up to 90% in Sqcvs (why though escapes me for the moment,
but it was fun :)).

Perhaps Svn has a similar design of course and it would be easy.

And btw Darcs is also "bad" in this regard - since it is serverless all
the logic is "in the client" so to speak. So reimplementing those 3000
lines of Haskell is not an option :).

What we *could* do is of course to set up some kind of gateway
(regardless if we go with Svn/CVS/whatever) so that it is at least easy
to checkout/update the tree for readonly purposes.

Hacking up something like that would be fun.

> It's not necessary to implement svn natively,
> though, given that we have OSProcess arounnd.  Just fork-exec svn
> processes as necessary.

It wasn't "necessary" with CVS either - it is just that Tim has issues
on RiscOS (not sure what they are at the moment) and that there is a
"cleanliness" of course if we could have a mechanism that works on all
platforms that Squeak works including the really odd ones. But... of
course, we should also remember that there is always a dependency on the
other parts of the VM build system like gcc etc. So any VCS that builds
somewhat cleanly using gcc doesn't add any problem AFAICT.
 		
> Incidentally, if you do switch to SVN, be aware that you don't need to
> bother with all the HTTP-based stuff that they try to get you to use. 
> The "svn+ssh" mode works just fine and is equivalent to accessing CVS
> over ssh the familiar way it is done on SourceForge.
> 
> I don't know anything about darcs or about the different styles of VCS
> systems, so can't help there.
> 
> -Lex

Just a quick note about Darcs:

I just love it. :) Even if we don't go with Darcs for the Squeak VM (and
I suspect highly we won't, since the people that have the vote (=port
maintainers) are so much against it) I intend to set up a Darcs "mirror"
of the Squeak CVS and I also intend to use it for all my other personal
needs. It is just so damn wonderful.

I really, *really* recommend everyone to take a swift look just to
broaden your views, totally regardless of the Squeak VM hosting issue.
And it is EASY to play with it a few minutes.

regards, Göran