ZDoom on GitHub

News about ZDoom

ZDoom on GitHub

Postby randi » Mon Jun 24, 2013 7:13 pm

For those interested in ZDoom's development, the source code repository has migrated to GitHub: http://github.com/rheit/zdoom
User avatar
randi
Site Admin
 
Joined: 09 Jul 2003

Re: ZDoom on GitHub

Postby Xaser » Mon Jun 24, 2013 7:55 pm

For those worried about the move affecting their workflow, you shouldn't fear: Git's not nearly as intimidating as it's made out to be. While it's a bit more complex than SVN and other centralized systems, the most basic use case only adds an extra step to the process -- since you now have a local copy of the entire repository, you first commit to it and then issue a "push" command to sync the changes to the server. This slight increase in complexity brings tons of cool features with it, including local commits/history and branching that actually works, to name the most basic of the bunch.

If you're new to the process, Randy made a good post here outlining the basics. This guide on transitioning from SVN to Git might be worth a read, too.
User avatar
Xaser
secretly a supercomputer being a government
 
Joined: 20 Jul 2003
Location: .plɹoʍɹǝʌǝu.

Re: ZDoom on GitHub

Postby DaMan » Tue Jun 25, 2013 10:17 pm

Goodbye intelligible SVN number. :(
User avatar
DaMan
 
Joined: 01 Jan 2010
Location: Silverdome brother

Re: ZDoom on GitHub

Postby Graf Zahl » Wed Jun 26, 2013 2:49 am

A small loss. Don't get hung up on the only thing SVN had in its favor. For us developers git is like a breath of fresh air - finally the whole setup is in a state where working with it is as it should.
User avatar
Graf Zahl
 
Joined: 19 Jul 2003
Location: Germany

Re: ZDoom on GitHub

Postby Blzut3 » Wed Jun 26, 2013 4:23 am

Because <tag>-<revision#>, or in Zandronum's case a timestamp, is soooo complicated. :P
Blzut3
Pronounced: B-l-zut
 
Joined: 24 Nov 2004

Re: ZDoom on GitHub

Postby FishyClockwork » Wed Jun 26, 2013 8:45 am

Apologies in advance if this isn't the right thread.

Is the ChangeLog still going to be updated or am I forced to go to GitHub to view recent changes? Not that I mind, just curious is all.
FishyClockwork
 
Joined: 23 Feb 2011

Re: ZDoom on GitHub

Postby Graf Zahl » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:11 am

Randi said it's a bit complicated to do a proper display for git's revision history with multiple branches. I hope it gets solved but it's clearly not as easy as for SVN.
User avatar
Graf Zahl
 
Joined: 19 Jul 2003
Location: Germany

Re: ZDoom on GitHub

Postby Xaser » Wed Jun 26, 2013 12:40 pm

I'd like to say that for simplicity's sake, the changelog should just list commits in chronological order with a field somewhere in the post saying what branch it's for, then maybe have a dropdown box at the top of the page to filter by branch. I feel as if users of the changelog won't be interested (or, even more importantly, might be confused by) a tree-like view, so we can leave that to Github since that's where the actual developers will congregate.
User avatar
Xaser
secretly a supercomputer being a government
 
Joined: 20 Jul 2003
Location: .plɹoʍɹǝʌǝu.

Re: ZDoom on GitHub

Postby Graf Zahl » Wed Jun 26, 2013 1:20 pm

Xaser wrote:saying what branch it's for,



Easier said than done. In Git, a branch is merely a label to a specific commit. Depending on what was merged a commit can belong to several branches.
As it is currently set up with the master and maint branch, lots of commits belong to both at the same time. It'll get even more confusing once a feature branch gets merged back. Then linearity is completely thrown out of the window.

If you want to have a bit of fun, take a graphical log viewer and have a look at the GZDoom repository. It's 4 branches all over the place (master/maint of ZDoom and master/maint of GZDoom) with countless merges between them.
User avatar
Graf Zahl
 
Joined: 19 Jul 2003
Location: Germany

Re: ZDoom on GitHub

Postby Xaser » Wed Jun 26, 2013 5:35 pm

I still think that's overcomplicating it. I'm suggesting treating the changelog as a literal log -- when a commit is made (including merge commits), create a changelog entry with the commit message and the branch it was committed to and be done with it (i.e. never change the log entry again).

Of course, this would require some new infrastructure since this sort of thing can't be auto-generated by just looking at the git tree, so that route would involve getting one's hands a bit dirty or erecting a "code wanted" sign somewhere. It still seems like the most clear solution for replacing the SVN changelog page with something as easily readable by the layperson, though.

[EDIT] The more I think about it, though, the more I realize that it's probably better to just make the 'Changelog' link point here. Why re-invent the wheel? ;)
User avatar
Xaser
secretly a supercomputer being a government
 
Joined: 20 Jul 2003
Location: .plɹoʍɹǝʌǝu.

Re: ZDoom on GitHub

Postby randi » Wed Jun 26, 2013 6:11 pm

Xaser wrote:Why re-invent the wheel? ;)

It's not exactly the most readable thing when you actually want to see everything that's been changed for one. It doesn't know anything about the SVN revision numbers for another.

As for which branches a commit belongs to, the solution is git branch --contains. This will list all the branches that contain a commit right now. There is no way to reliably determine which branch originally contained a commit. (Or at least, I don't think there is.) Especially since feature branches can disappear after they've been merged into master. There's even no guarantee that the master repository ever had the original branch a commit was made to.

Mostly, though, the main "problem" is that it's been a few years since I've done any web programming. I'm going to have to relearn some stuff to redo this. The current backed runs svn log every five minute and dumps any new changes into a SQL database that the web interface pulls from. With git, it would probably be better to use git log and other command-line facilities to retrieve this information on demand than try to store it in a separate database.
User avatar
randi
Site Admin
 
Joined: 09 Jul 2003

Re: ZDoom on GitHub

Postby AlexMax » Thu Jun 27, 2013 9:57 pm

randi wrote:
Xaser wrote:Why re-invent the wheel? ;)

There is no way to reliably determine which branch originally contained a commit. (Or at least, I don't think there is.)


There isn't. You'd have to bake the branchname into the commit for it to work. The closest git comes to this is Annotated Tags, but these are tags, not branches.
User avatar
AlexMax
Certainly they existed...
 
Joined: 15 Apr 2006

Re: ZDoom on GitHub

Postby randi » Thu Jun 27, 2013 10:33 pm

The Changelog page now tracks the git repository, more or less. I'll get to the details pages (which would handle the SVN->Git mapping) later.
User avatar
randi
Site Admin
 
Joined: 09 Jul 2003

Re: ZDoom on GitHub

Postby Gez » Fri Jun 28, 2013 3:31 am

randi wrote:The Changelog page now tracks the git repository, more or less. I'll get to the details pages (which would handle the SVN->Git mapping) later.

So, will all the links such as http://zdoom.org/Changelog/3374/files work again then, or will the wiki need to have all its [wiki=Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Rev]rev links[/wiki] updated?

(Huh, wiki tag cannot handle slashes. rev links.)
Gez
 
Joined: 06 Jul 2007

Re: ZDoom on GitHub

Postby randi » Fri Jun 28, 2013 6:22 am

That is the plan.
User avatar
randi
Site Admin
 
Joined: 09 Jul 2003

Next

Return to ZDoom News

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest