Hey, does anyone know if it's possible, now that sylverant repo is over at sourceforge, to have an overview of (recent) commits, without having to check out source with a GIT client ? When I mouse-over GIT on the project page I see all sub-projects but it's a whole lot of pain going through each and checking if there was a recent commit, if you get what I mean.
(I tried google-fu but I'm at a loss for how to describe what I want to know...)
Question about sylverant commits at sourceforge
Moderators: BlueCrab, Aleron Ives
-
- DCEmu Crazy Poster
- Posts: 32
- https://www.artistsworkshop.eu/meble-kuchenne-na-wymiar-warszawa-gdzie-zamowic/
- Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2014 4:43 am
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
- Aleron Ives
- DCEmu Nutter
- Posts: 870
- Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2011 2:15 pm
- Location: California
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 25 times
- Contact:
Re: Question about sylverant commits at sourceforge
I've been using this:
http://sourceforge.net/p/sylverant/ship ... it_browser
It's not as user-friendly as SVN, since each commit just gets a random hash instead of a number, so you'll need to rely on the commit comments to know whether you've viewed each commit yet. It also appears that you'd have check each component of Sylverant separately, since you can't view the commit browser for the entire project at one time.
http://sourceforge.net/p/sylverant/ship ... it_browser
It's not as user-friendly as SVN, since each commit just gets a random hash instead of a number, so you'll need to rely on the commit comments to know whether you've viewed each commit yet. It also appears that you'd have check each component of Sylverant separately, since you can't view the commit browser for the entire project at one time.
"Fear the HUnewearl."
- BlueCrab
- The Crabby Overlord
- Posts: 5652
- Joined: Mon May 27, 2002 11:31 am
- Location: Sailing the Skies of Arcadia
- Has thanked: 9 times
- Been thanked: 69 times
- Contact:
Re: Question about sylverant commits at sourceforge
You can also subscribe to the project and sourceforge will email you whenever a commit gets pushed up to any of the repositories. If you use an RSS reader of any sort, you can also subscribe to the RSS feed for project updates (should be on the right side of the main project page).
As for the hows and whys of Git (addressing Aleron Ives' post)...
The reason Git doesn't assign revision numbers as SVN does is because it is designed as a decentralized system. Individual developers each can (and indeed do in most cases) have their own active working trees that they can commit to without necessarily syncing them up to any central repository. Let's say we have what you might want to call "revision 42" in the central repository and Developer A and Developer B both commit to their own private repositories. Both of them would be apt to call their next revision "revision 43", but which one actually is revision 43? Such points of contention are why Git doesn't have revision numbers so to speak and refers to things by hashes. That said, it is possible to come up with ways of doing revision numbers based on a canonical source repository (that's what the build scripts for ship_server do to make /ver work, for instance). What it boils down to in the end is that Git is a decentralized system whereas SVN is a centralized system.
As for one being more user-friendly than the other, from an end-user perspective, I don't see any difference. From a project developer perspective, Git is a long way ahead of SVN in that regard. SVN was leaps and bounds better than CVS, but in my opinion Git is an even bigger leap than SVN was.
As for why each subproject has its own repository when I switched to Git. That was a matter of choice on my part. It makes more sense to manage each piece independently. Also, it tends to cut down on the size of the repository checkouts, especially for those that don't need everything.
As for the hows and whys of Git (addressing Aleron Ives' post)...
The reason Git doesn't assign revision numbers as SVN does is because it is designed as a decentralized system. Individual developers each can (and indeed do in most cases) have their own active working trees that they can commit to without necessarily syncing them up to any central repository. Let's say we have what you might want to call "revision 42" in the central repository and Developer A and Developer B both commit to their own private repositories. Both of them would be apt to call their next revision "revision 43", but which one actually is revision 43? Such points of contention are why Git doesn't have revision numbers so to speak and refers to things by hashes. That said, it is possible to come up with ways of doing revision numbers based on a canonical source repository (that's what the build scripts for ship_server do to make /ver work, for instance). What it boils down to in the end is that Git is a decentralized system whereas SVN is a centralized system.
As for one being more user-friendly than the other, from an end-user perspective, I don't see any difference. From a project developer perspective, Git is a long way ahead of SVN in that regard. SVN was leaps and bounds better than CVS, but in my opinion Git is an even bigger leap than SVN was.
As for why each subproject has its own repository when I switched to Git. That was a matter of choice on my part. It makes more sense to manage each piece independently. Also, it tends to cut down on the size of the repository checkouts, especially for those that don't need everything.
-
- DCEmu Crazy Poster
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2014 4:43 am
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Question about sylverant commits at sourceforge
I i'll go subscribe to the project since I like following source development and stuff ^_^. Thanks for the prompt answers :3