[RFC] What repo to use for 2.0 ?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
21 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[RFC] What repo to use for 2.0 ?

Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
Hi everyone,

As we are getting closed to first working code for OpenSIPS 2.0 (a proto
core including config, transport, threading, reactor and dispatcher), we
will upload the code the public SF repo.

I would like to get some feedback from you about what repo type to use -
as we have the opportunity to start a fresh new piece of code, we have
the option to use a different repo than SVN.

SF offers the following options
    - SVN
    - git
    - mercurial
    - bazaar

Should we keep SVN ? pros ? minuses ? something much better ?


Regards,
Bogdan

PS: should we create a poll on the project web site ?

--
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
www.voice-system.ro


_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [RFC] What repo to use for 2.0 ?

Norman Brandinger
I have found that the speed of mercurial seems to be an issue with
larger sized project.

For example, try downloading adium: hg clone http://hg.adium.im/adium

My vote is for git.

Regards,
Norm

Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> As we are getting closed to first working code for OpenSIPS 2.0 (a proto
> core including config, transport, threading, reactor and dispatcher), we
> will upload the code the public SF repo.
>
> I would like to get some feedback from you about what repo type to use -
> as we have the opportunity to start a fresh new piece of code, we have
> the option to use a different repo than SVN.
>
> SF offers the following options
>     - SVN
>     - git
>     - mercurial
>     - bazaar
>
> Should we keep SVN ? pros ? minuses ? something much better ?
>
>
> Regards,
> Bogdan
>
> PS: should we create a poll on the project web site ?
>
>  


_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [RFC] What repo to use for 2.0 ?

Stanisław Pitucha
In reply to this post by Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
On 02.03.2010 18:18, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:
> SF offers the following options
>     - SVN
>     - git
>     - mercurial
>     - bazaar
>
> Should we keep SVN ? pros ? minuses ? something much better ?

I'd go with - "please no SVN" ;) (or at least keep an official mirror in
another repo type)
Why?
We're keeping a number of patches that are company-specific, so will
never go into Opensips-proper and could be much easier to manage if they
were in some distributed repo supporting patch queues properly.
Also managing what patches were selectively ported back is a bit easier
with git I guess.

I know that git and mercurial support patch queues quite well. Also
github and bitbucket services are quite popular if people want to keep a
copy of their own forks / branches public. I think that could also help
with patch submissions - instead of attaching a patch to some tracker
item and looking up which revision they patched in the first place,
people could just point at a specific github/bitbucket revision in their
fork.
From your side, it could be also helpful - instead of posting something
like "Please test the attached patch - it is a highly experimental fix"
(it's your comment from one of the bug reports), you can just say -
checkout revision "8678289312" which is a branch used only for that bug
- available on the official repo, but not in any trunk or version-branch.

I'd be really happy if Opensips used either git or mercurial.

Cannot say anything about bzr - maybe it's good, but I never used it and
it seems to be less popular choice...

Thanks,
Stan

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [RFC] What repo to use for 2.0 ?

Fabián Sellés Rosa
In reply to this post by Norman Brandinger
You can offer both GIT and SVN with git-svn [1]. I think that git it's
very more powerful and comfortable to use than subversion.


[1] http://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-svn.html

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [RFC] What repo to use for 2.0 ?

Brett Nemeroff
In reply to this post by Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
Bogdan,
I personally really like SVN. It's widely accepted and well documented. I'm sure that some newer code repo systems offer some really nice features, but I'm curious what percent of the community has used newer repo types and would be comfortable using them to their full potential (properly!).

I'm speaking, of course, as a user and not a developer. 

Thanks for your consideration. :)

-Brett



On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi everyone,

As we are getting closed to first working code for OpenSIPS 2.0 (a proto
core including config, transport, threading, reactor and dispatcher), we
will upload the code the public SF repo.

I would like to get some feedback from you about what repo type to use -
as we have the opportunity to start a fresh new piece of code, we have
the option to use a different repo than SVN.

SF offers the following options
   - SVN
   - git
   - mercurial
   - bazaar

Should we keep SVN ? pros ? minuses ? something much better ?


Regards,
Bogdan

PS: should we create a poll on the project web site ?

--
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
www.voice-system.ro


_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users


_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [RFC] What repo to use for 2.0 ?

David J.-2
Brett,

 From a user perspective then its not so difficult to learn a few extra
commands.
Most users I would imagine want to download the code and compile.

Although, I agree that SVN is by far more adopted.

I think going forward, companies like GitHub and BitBucket offer great
code hosting options for developers, which seems to be gaining lots of
traction. Most projects I see are moving off google code which I believe
is svn based.

I personally have invested lots of time in SVN, but wouldn't think it
would be a burden to try something new.

Just an opinion.




Brett Nemeroff wrote:

> Bogdan,
> I personally really like SVN. It's widely accepted and well
> documented. I'm sure that some newer code repo systems offer some
> really nice features, but I'm curious what percent of the community
> has used newer repo types and would be comfortable using them to their
> full potential (properly!).
>
> I'm speaking, of course, as a user and not a developer.
>
> Thanks for your consideration. :)
>
> -Brett
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>     Hi everyone,
>
>     As we are getting closed to first working code for OpenSIPS 2.0 (a
>     proto
>     core including config, transport, threading, reactor and
>     dispatcher), we
>     will upload the code the public SF repo.
>
>     I would like to get some feedback from you about what repo type to
>     use -
>     as we have the opportunity to start a fresh new piece of code, we have
>     the option to use a different repo than SVN.
>
>     SF offers the following options
>        - SVN
>        - git
>        - mercurial
>        - bazaar
>
>     Should we keep SVN ? pros ? minuses ? something much better ?
>
>
>     Regards,
>     Bogdan
>
>     PS: should we create a poll on the project web site ?
>
>     --
>     Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>     www.voice-system.ro <http://www.voice-system.ro>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Users mailing list
>     [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>     http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>  


_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [RFC] What repo to use for 2.0 ?

Brett Nemeroff
I'm certainly open to trying new things. But without looking into the complexities of the newer systems, I know that they can get very complicated very quickly. I do like, however, integrated code hosting, like you suggested. But I know similar options are available with SVN.

Personally, I don't care as long as it's easy to pull from a command line. :) right?
-Brett
 

On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 1:19 PM, David J. <[hidden email]> wrote:
Brett,

 From a user perspective then its not so difficult to learn a few extra
commands.
Most users I would imagine want to download the code and compile.

Although, I agree that SVN is by far more adopted.

I think going forward, companies like GitHub and BitBucket offer great
code hosting options for developers, which seems to be gaining lots of
traction. Most projects I see are moving off google code which I believe
is svn based.

I personally have invested lots of time in SVN, but wouldn't think it
would be a burden to try something new.

Just an opinion.




Brett Nemeroff wrote:
> Bogdan,
> I personally really like SVN. It's widely accepted and well
> documented. I'm sure that some newer code repo systems offer some
> really nice features, but I'm curious what percent of the community
> has used newer repo types and would be comfortable using them to their
> full potential (properly!).
>
> I'm speaking, of course, as a user and not a developer.
>
> Thanks for your consideration. :)
>
> -Brett
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>     Hi everyone,
>
>     As we are getting closed to first working code for OpenSIPS 2.0 (a
>     proto
>     core including config, transport, threading, reactor and
>     dispatcher), we
>     will upload the code the public SF repo.
>
>     I would like to get some feedback from you about what repo type to
>     use -
>     as we have the opportunity to start a fresh new piece of code, we have
>     the option to use a different repo than SVN.
>
>     SF offers the following options
>        - SVN
>        - git
>        - mercurial
>        - bazaar
>
>     Should we keep SVN ? pros ? minuses ? something much better ?
>
>
>     Regards,
>     Bogdan
>
>     PS: should we create a poll on the project web site ?
>
>     --
>     Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>     www.voice-system.ro <http://www.voice-system.ro>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Users mailing list
>     [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>


_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users


_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [RFC] What repo to use for 2.0 ?

Saúl Ibarra Corretgé
In reply to this post by Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
Hi,

El 02/03/10 19:18, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu escribió:

> Hi everyone,
>
> As we are getting closed to first working code for OpenSIPS 2.0 (a proto
> core including config, transport, threading, reactor and dispatcher), we
> will upload the code the public SF repo.
>
> I would like to get some feedback from you about what repo type to use -
> as we have the opportunity to start a fresh new piece of code, we have
> the option to use a different repo than SVN.
>
> SF offers the following options
>      - SVN
>      - git
>      - mercurial
>      - bazaar
>
> Should we keep SVN ? pros ? minuses ? something much better ?
>

I'm glad you brought this question up :)

I think it would be important to switch to a distributed version control
system, so I'd leave svn out. Being able to do local commints and keep
you own branch in sync with trunk before merging changes is much more
easier than with a centralized one. :)

Personally I'm not very familiar with mercurial or bazaar, but Git is
quite well known for being able to integrate with other non distributed
VCS as svn.

That said, I'd go for Git, but having a svn mirror would also be nice so
that people can still fetch the source the 'old skool' way.
>
> PS: should we create a poll on the project web site ?
>

That would be nice too.


Best regards,


--
Saúl Ibarra Corretgé
AG Projects

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [RFC] What repo to use for 2.0 ?

Stanisław Pitucha
In reply to this post by Stanisław Pitucha
Sorry, my message seems to be cut by mailman (according to the
sourceforge archive) - resending full version:

I'd go with - "please no SVN" ;) (or at least keep an official mirror
in another repo type)
Why?

- We're keeping a number of patches that are company-specific, so will
never go into Opensips-proper and could be much easier to manage if
they were in some distributed repo supporting patch queues properly.
Also managing what patches were selectively ported back is a bit
easier with git I guess. I know that git and mercurial support patch
queues quite well at least.
-  Also github and bitbucket services are quite popular if people want
to keep a copy of their own forks / branches public. I think that
could also help with patch submissions - instead of attaching a patch
to some tracker item and looking up which revision they patched in the
first place, people could just point at a specific github/bitbucket
revision in their fork.
- From your side, it could be also helpful - instead of posting
something like "Please test the attached patch - it is a highly
experimental fix" (it's your comment from one of the bug reports), you
can just say - checkout revision "8678289312" which is a branch used
only for that bug - available on the official repo, but not in any
trunk or version-branch. I'd be really happy if Opensips used either
git or mercurial.

Cannot say anything about bzr - maybe it's good, but I never used it
and it seems to be less popular choice...

Thanks,
Stan

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [RFC] What repo to use for 2.0 ?

Brett Nemeroff
In reply to this post by Saúl Ibarra Corretgé
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 2:17 PM, Saúl Ibarra Corretgé <[hidden email]> wrote:
That said, I'd go for Git, but having a svn mirror would also be nice so
that people can still fetch the source the 'old skool' way.


This cracks me up.. when did SVN become "old skool"? Where have I been? 

I hear good things about git.. I suppose I'd second that if we were going to jump ship. :)
-Brett
 

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [RFC] What repo to use for 2.0 ?

Mario Stocco
In reply to this post by Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
My vote to this informal poll is to move forward with git.

Cheers,

Mario Stocco
Advantia VoIP Systems

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [RFC] What repo to use for 2.0 ?

Jan Janak-2
In reply to this post by Brett Nemeroff
On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 3:24 PM, Brett Nemeroff <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 2:17 PM, Saúl Ibarra Corretgé <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>>
>> That said, I'd go for Git, but having a svn mirror would also be nice so
>> that people can still fetch the source the 'old skool' way.
>>
>
> This cracks me up.. when did SVN become "old skool"? Where have I been?
> I hear good things about git.. I suppose I'd second that if we were going to
> jump ship. :)

I maintain a git mirror of the SVN repository. If you want to
experiment with git, you can clone it with:

git clone http://git.sip-router.org/opensips

Contact me off the list if you want the scripts used to maintain the mirror.

-Jan

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [RFC] What repo to use for 2.0 ?

Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
In reply to this post by Brett Nemeroff
Hi Brett,

if you look here http://git.or.cz/course/svn.html, GIT and SVN (at least
from user perspective) are very similar (as concepts and commands too).

I would go for GIT (even if never used it so far), mainly because it is
distributed - sometime SF is slow (when using from europe) and sometimes
you want to keep private custom copies, but sync with the public version
- of course, this is for developers :)

Regards,
Bogdan

Brett Nemeroff wrote:

> Bogdan,
> I personally really like SVN. It's widely accepted and well
> documented. I'm sure that some newer code repo systems offer some
> really nice features, but I'm curious what percent of the community
> has used newer repo types and would be comfortable using them to their
> full potential (properly!).
>
> I'm speaking, of course, as a user and not a developer.
>
> Thanks for your consideration. :)
>
> -Brett
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>     Hi everyone,
>
>     As we are getting closed to first working code for OpenSIPS 2.0 (a
>     proto
>     core including config, transport, threading, reactor and
>     dispatcher), we
>     will upload the code the public SF repo.
>
>     I would like to get some feedback from you about what repo type to
>     use -
>     as we have the opportunity to start a fresh new piece of code, we have
>     the option to use a different repo than SVN.
>
>     SF offers the following options
>        - SVN
>        - git
>        - mercurial
>        - bazaar
>
>     Should we keep SVN ? pros ? minuses ? something much better ?
>
>
>     Regards,
>     Bogdan
>
>     PS: should we create a poll on the project web site ?
>
>     --
>     Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>     www.voice-system.ro <http://www.voice-system.ro>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Users mailing list
>     [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>     http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>  


--
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
www.voice-system.ro


_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [RFC] What repo to use for 2.0 ?

Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
In reply to this post by Fabián Sellés Rosa
Hi Fabian,

That is interesting - thanks for the hint ;)

Regards,
Bogdan

Fabián Sellés Rosa wrote:

> You can offer both GIT and SVN with git-svn [1]. I think that git it's
> very more powerful and comfortable to use than subversion.
>
>
> [1] http://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-svn.html
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>  


--
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
www.voice-system.ro


_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [RFC] What repo to use for 2.0 ?

Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
In reply to this post by David J.-2
Hi David,

I agree with you - SVN is well known by most of us, while git means
learning something new. Exactly this is why I pushed the question - if
there is something better (than SVN) out there, that may compensate (as
advantages) the task of learning it.

But as already said,GIT and SVN are quite similar in concept and
concepts, so it the learning process should be very easy.

Regards,
Bogdan

David J. wrote:

> Brett,
>
>  From a user perspective then its not so difficult to learn a few extra
> commands.
> Most users I would imagine want to download the code and compile.
>
> Although, I agree that SVN is by far more adopted.
>
> I think going forward, companies like GitHub and BitBucket offer great
> code hosting options for developers, which seems to be gaining lots of
> traction. Most projects I see are moving off google code which I believe
> is svn based.
>
> I personally have invested lots of time in SVN, but wouldn't think it
> would be a burden to try something new.
>
> Just an opinion.
>
>
>
>
> Brett Nemeroff wrote:
>  
>> Bogdan,
>> I personally really like SVN. It's widely accepted and well
>> documented. I'm sure that some newer code repo systems offer some
>> really nice features, but I'm curious what percent of the community
>> has used newer repo types and would be comfortable using them to their
>> full potential (properly!).
>>
>> I'm speaking, of course, as a user and not a developer.
>>
>> Thanks for your consideration. :)
>>
>> -Brett
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>>
>>     Hi everyone,
>>
>>     As we are getting closed to first working code for OpenSIPS 2.0 (a
>>     proto
>>     core including config, transport, threading, reactor and
>>     dispatcher), we
>>     will upload the code the public SF repo.
>>
>>     I would like to get some feedback from you about what repo type to
>>     use -
>>     as we have the opportunity to start a fresh new piece of code, we have
>>     the option to use a different repo than SVN.
>>
>>     SF offers the following options
>>        - SVN
>>        - git
>>        - mercurial
>>        - bazaar
>>
>>     Should we keep SVN ? pros ? minuses ? something much better ?
>>
>>
>>     Regards,
>>     Bogdan
>>
>>     PS: should we create a poll on the project web site ?
>>
>>     --
>>     Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>>     www.voice-system.ro <http://www.voice-system.ro>
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Users mailing list
>>     [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>     http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Users mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>>  
>>    
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>  


--
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
www.voice-system.ro


_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [RFC] What repo to use for 2.0 ?

Andreas Sikkema
On Mar 3, 2010, at 7:33 PM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote:

> But as already said,GIT and SVN are quite similar in concept and
> concepts, so it the learning process should be very easy.

If git is new than svn is more like CVS than anything else. DVCS's are _so_ much different than old school VCS's like CVS or SVN.

Check out this Mercurial tutorial, which is mostly about DVCS systems: http://hginit.com/

--
Andreas



_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [RFC] What repo to use for 2.0 ?

Brett Nemeroff
In reply to this post by Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
Bogdan,
Thanks for the link. I have to say after looking it over, git does look very nice. 

I do wonder, however, if conflict resolution is a bigger deal with a DVCS?

-Brett

On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 12:27 PM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi Brett,

if you look here http://git.or.cz/course/svn.html, GIT and SVN (at least
from user perspective) are very similar (as concepts and commands too).

I would go for GIT (even if never used it so far), mainly because it is
distributed - sometime SF is slow (when using from europe) and sometimes
you want to keep private custom copies, but sync with the public version
- of course, this is for developers :)

Regards,
Bogdan



_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [RFC] What repo to use for 2.0 ?

Brett Nemeroff
In reply to this post by Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
Hey, I know this is outside of the scope of opensips.. but does git support keyword substitutions?

Thanks,
Brett


On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi everyone,

As we are getting closed to first working code for OpenSIPS 2.0 (a proto
core including config, transport, threading, reactor and dispatcher), we
will upload the code the public SF repo.

I would like to get some feedback from you about what repo type to use -
as we have the opportunity to start a fresh new piece of code, we have
the option to use a different repo than SVN.

SF offers the following options
   - SVN
   - git
   - mercurial
   - bazaar

Should we keep SVN ? pros ? minuses ? something much better ?


Regards,
Bogdan

PS: should we create a poll on the project web site ?

--
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
www.voice-system.ro


_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users


_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [RFC] What repo to use for 2.0 ?

Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
you mean like SVN keywords Id, Author, etc ?

Regards,
Bogdan

Brett Nemeroff wrote:

> Hey, I know this is outside of the scope of opensips.. but does git
> support keyword substitutions?
>
> Thanks,
> Brett
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>     Hi everyone,
>
>     As we are getting closed to first working code for OpenSIPS 2.0 (a
>     proto
>     core including config, transport, threading, reactor and
>     dispatcher), we
>     will upload the code the public SF repo.
>
>     I would like to get some feedback from you about what repo type to
>     use -
>     as we have the opportunity to start a fresh new piece of code, we have
>     the option to use a different repo than SVN.
>
>     SF offers the following options
>        - SVN
>        - git
>        - mercurial
>        - bazaar
>
>     Should we keep SVN ? pros ? minuses ? something much better ?
>
>
>     Regards,
>     Bogdan
>
>     PS: should we create a poll on the project web site ?
>
>     --
>     Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>     www.voice-system.ro <http://www.voice-system.ro>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Users mailing list
>     [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>     http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
>  


--
Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
www.voice-system.ro


_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [RFC] What repo to use for 2.0 ?

Brett Nemeroff
Yeah.. I tried looking around for it, but all I could find was a bunch of posts where people said it was a horrible idea. I understand the problems with keyword expansion, I'd still like to use it. 

The explanations of how to go around using keyword expansion with file hashes and post commit scripts just seems like more hacking than necessary. What a pain! Maybe I'm missing something..


On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 11:52 AM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <[hidden email]> wrote:
you mean like SVN keywords Id, Author, etc ?

Regards,
Bogdan


_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
12