Virgile Andreani reshared this.
Content warning: nerd stuff: version control
like this
Moffintosh reshared this.
I've been doing some #writing that may or may not ever see the light of day, purely for my own enrichment. The process has been interesting. Because I want to focus on the content itself, I decided to just use #Markdown files in a #git repository.
It seems a good workflow, but the commit messages are awkward.
It seems a good workflow, but the commit messages are awkward.
fedops 💙💛 likes this.
Markdown + git works really well for me as a system, too. I will admit I don't always put a lot of thought into my commit messages though, haha. Sometimes they go along the lines of "completed this HORRIBLE CHAPTER" or even just "the two scenes I wrote this morning"... 😬
Strypey
•Content warning: nerd stuff: version control
I read a blog recently claiming that Git is not a VCS at all, but rather a collaboration tool, and that it ought to be used with a proper VCS, that increments version numbers etc:
https://feld.eth.li/posts/2018/01/git-is-not-revision-control/
I'm not sure I buy the conclusion, but it certainly illustrated the differences between Git and older VCS.
Git Is Not Revision Control
feld.eth.liJonathan Lamothe
Content warning: nerd stuff: version control
Strypey
•Content warning: nerd stuff: version control
> Does Mercurial address these
No idea. Like you, Git is all I've ever used, and very little.
My understanding is that prior to Git, all merges were manual, which I imagine puts a much greater workload on maintainers, and increases the chances of errors sneaking into the code during even routine merges. Also pre-Git VCS used a database, rather than a folder heirarchy with config files, so they're inherently more centralized. Which has pros and cons.
(1/2)
Strypey
•Content warning: nerd stuff: version control
But Git has existed for a while now, and other VCS software may have adapted some of the features and workflows it pioneered. Again, no idea.
(2/2)
Jonathan Lamothe
Content warning: nerd stuff: version control
Strypey
•Content warning: nerd stuff: version control
Total tangent from your original question, but have you checked out SourceHut? It's a server package for hosting decentralized code forges, using only Git and email, which as I understand it couldn't be done with any of the older, more centralized VCS:
https://sourcehut.org/
sourcehut - the hacker's forge
sourcehut.orgJonathan Lamothe
Content warning: nerd stuff: version control
@Strypey I've actually been using Gitea, though I hear there's been some unpleasantness going on with the corporate end of that.
Might be worth a look.
Strypey
•Content warning: nerd stuff: version control
> I hear there's been some unpleasantness going on with the corporate end of
[Gitea]So I hear. Some groups hosting it, including @Codeberg, have forked a community version called @forgejo.
Jonathan Lamothe likes this.
Jonathan Lamothe
Content warning: nerd stuff: version control
Codeberg.org likes this.
Loïc Dachary
•Content warning: nerd stuff: version control
@strypey @forgejo Forgejo is a drop in replacement of Gitea, there is no porting necessary.
https://forgejo.org/download/
Forgejo
forgejo.orgSundew
•Content warning: nerd stuff: version control
Mercurial has a clear distinction between committing/updating to prior commits, and exchanging commits with others.
One way this is achieved is that each commit has the branch name frozen into it, which means that pushing or pulling changes isn't _modifying_ a pointer to a commit at the other end - it's a purely additive operation.
So, you can't accidentally remove stuff via a push.
For some teams, this means you don't need to operate a pull request process.
Sundew
•Content warning: nerd stuff: version control
Also, Mercurial _feels_ nice.
* It feels like a more cohesive design from the get-go, whereas git feels like it organically grew, warts and all.
* The hg windows experience is just as good as the linux one.
* The hg GUI tooling is great, the CLI is natural, and the documentation is excellent.
Jonathan Lamothe likes this.
CapritiaJH
•Content warning: nerd stuff: version control
Mercurial SCM
www.mercurial-scm.orgHenrik Pauli
•Content warning: nerd stuff: version control
Jonathan Lamothe
Content warning: nerd stuff: version control
Henrik Pauli likes this.
Henrik Pauli
•Content warning: nerd stuff: version control
Henrik Pauli
•Content warning: nerd stuff: version control
Jonathan Lamothe
Content warning: nerd stuff: version control
Henrik Pauli
•Content warning: nerd stuff: version control
• named branches where the branch name isn't just a pointer to the tipmost commit of the branch. Think calling something 'trunk' and 'production' and every commit coloured to that branch
• phases, a feature that tries to protect you against modifying publicised changesets by default
(• and the ever-beta changeset evolution which would allow users to reliably improve on pub csets)