{"thread":{"id":"1485","subject":"[OT?] git tools at SourceForge ?","startedAt":"2005-08-12T19:07:39Z","lastAt":"2005-08-13T01:16:48Z","messageCount":12,"participants":["Wolfgang Denk","Junio C Hamano","Daniel Barkalow","Kirby C. Bohling","Linus Torvalds","Martin Langhoff","David Lang"],"isPatch":false,"patchVersion":null,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"7136","messageId":"20050812190739.AC222352633@atlas.denx.de","threadId":"1485","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"[OT?] git tools at SourceForge ?","fromName":"Wolfgang Denk","fromEmail":"wd@denx.de","sentAt":"2005-08-12T19:07:39Z","receivedAt":"2005-08-12T19:07:39Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"wd@denx.de","avatar":null},"body":"This is somewhat off topic here, so I apologize, but  I  didn't  know\nany better place to ask:\n\nHas anybody any information if SourceForge is going to provide git  /\ncogito / ... for the projects they host? I asked SF, and they openend\na new Feature Request (item #1252867); the message I received sounded\nas if I was the first person on the planet to ask...\n\nAm I really alone with this?\n\nBest regards,\n\nWolfgang Denk\n\n-- \nSoftware Engineering:  Embedded and Realtime Systems,  Embedded Linux\nPhone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd@denx.de\nThere are three things I always forget. Names, faces -  the  third  I\ncan't remember.                                         - Italo Svevo\n"},{"id":"7141","messageId":"7vr7cysxif.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net","threadId":"1485","inReplyTo":"20050812190739.AC222352633@atlas.denx.de","subject":"Re: [OT?] git tools at SourceForge ?","fromName":"Junio C Hamano","fromEmail":"junkio@cox.net","sentAt":"2005-08-12T20:36:40Z","receivedAt":"2005-08-12T20:36:40Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"gitster@pobox.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/54884?v=4"},"body":"Wolfgang Denk <wd@denx.de> writes:\n\n> Has anybody any information if SourceForge is going to provide git  /\n> cogito / ... for the projects they host? I asked SF, and they openend\n> a new Feature Request (item #1252867); the message I received sounded\n> as if I was the first person on the planet to ask...\n>\n> Am I really alone with this?\n\nEarlier Johannes Schindelin sent in a bug report he found on one\narchitecture in their build farm, so apparently he has access to\nit.\n\nI'd actually welcome people who have access to such a build\nnetwork, time and of course willingness to start portability\nfixes on various platforms for git-core.\n"},{"id":"7142","messageId":"Pine.LNX.4.63.0508121634570.12816@iabervon.org","threadId":"1485","inReplyTo":"20050812190739.AC222352633@atlas.denx.de","subject":"Re: [OT?] git tools at SourceForge ?","fromName":"Daniel Barkalow","fromEmail":"barkalow@iabervon.org","sentAt":"2005-08-12T20:46:34Z","receivedAt":"2005-08-12T20:46:34Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"barkalow@iabervon.org","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/55364219?v=4"},"body":"On Fri, 12 Aug 2005, Wolfgang Denk wrote:\n\n> This is somewhat off topic here, so I apologize, but  I  didn't  know\n> any better place to ask:\n> \n> Has anybody any information if SourceForge is going to provide git  /\n> cogito / ... for the projects they host? I asked SF, and they openend\n> a new Feature Request (item #1252867); the message I received sounded\n> as if I was the first person on the planet to ask...\n> \n> Am I really alone with this?\n\nThe git architecture makes the central server less important, and it's \neasy to run your own. Also, kernel.org is providing space to a set of \npeople with a large overlap with git users, since git hasn't been \nparticularly publicized and kernel.org is hosting git.\n\n\t-Daniel\n*This .sig left intentionally blank*\n"},{"id":"7143","messageId":"20050812210611.GF13550@birddog.com","threadId":"1485","inReplyTo":"Pine.LNX.4.63.0508121634570.12816@iabervon.org","subject":"Re: [OT?] git tools at SourceForge ?","fromName":"Kirby C. Bohling","fromEmail":"kbohling@birddog.com","sentAt":"2005-08-12T21:06:11Z","receivedAt":"2005-08-12T21:06:11Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"kbohling@birddog.com","avatar":null},"body":"On Fri, Aug 12, 2005 at 04:46:34PM -0400, Daniel Barkalow wrote:\n> On Fri, 12 Aug 2005, Wolfgang Denk wrote:\n> \n> > This is somewhat off topic here, so I apologize, but  I  didn't  know\n> > any better place to ask:\n> > \n> > Has anybody any information if SourceForge is going to provide git  /\n> > cogito / ... for the projects they host? I asked SF, and they openend\n> > a new Feature Request (item #1252867); the message I received sounded\n> > as if I was the first person on the planet to ask...\n> > \n> > Am I really alone with this?\n> \n> The git architecture makes the central server less important, and it's \n> easy to run your own. Also, kernel.org is providing space to a set of \n> people with a large overlap with git users, since git hasn't been \n> particularly publicized and kernel.org is hosting git.\n> \n\nI don't think he wants sourceforge to host git, I think he'd like\nsourceforge to provide access to source trees via git, instead of\ncvs.  Read that as, I want to do:\n\ngit pull http://www.sourceforge.net/packageName\n\ninstead of:\n\ncvs -d pserver:www.sourceforge.net co packageName\n\n\tWhile it might be easy to host your own project, Linus has some\ninfamous quote I'll paraphrase as \"Real men don't make backups, they\nupload to public FTP and let other's make backups...\".\n\n\tI know if I was working on OSS project, I wouldn't be too\nheartbroken to let someone else run the security, backup, and\ngeneral SA duties for me.  More time to write code that way...\n\n    Kirby\n"},{"id":"7149","messageId":"20050812220120.EF075353AED@atlas.denx.de","threadId":"1485","inReplyTo":"20050812210611.GF13550@birddog.com","subject":"Re: [OT?] git tools at SourceForge ?","fromName":"Wolfgang Denk","fromEmail":"wd@denx.de","sentAt":"2005-08-12T22:01:20Z","receivedAt":"2005-08-12T22:01:20Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"wd@denx.de","avatar":null},"body":"In message <20050812210611.GF13550@birddog.com> you wrote:\n>\n> > The git architecture makes the central server less important, and it's \n> > easy to run your own. Also, kernel.org is providing space to a set of \n\nYes, cou can - but for a popular project like U-Boot in our case  you\ndon't really want to ;-)\n\n> > people with a large overlap with git users, since git hasn't been \n> > particularly publicized and kernel.org is hosting git.\n> \n> I don't think he wants sourceforge to host git, I think he'd like\n> sourceforge to provide access to source trees via git, instead of\n> cvs.  Read that as, I want to do:\n\nCorrect, that's what I am looking for. My  hope  is  that  if  enough\npeople ask SF might actually provide such a service.\n\nBest regards,\n\nWolfgang Denk\n\n-- \nSoftware Engineering:  Embedded and Realtime Systems,  Embedded Linux\nPhone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd@denx.de\nDisc space - the final frontier!\n"},{"id":"7151","messageId":"Pine.LNX.4.58.0508121513530.3295@g5.osdl.org","threadId":"1485","inReplyTo":"Pine.LNX.4.63.0508121634570.12816@iabervon.org","subject":"Re: [OT?] git tools at SourceForge ?","fromName":"Linus Torvalds","fromEmail":"torvalds@osdl.org","sentAt":"2005-08-12T22:27:52Z","receivedAt":"2005-08-12T22:27:52Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"torvalds@linux-foundation.org","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/1024025?v=4"},"body":"\n\nOn Fri, 12 Aug 2005, Daniel Barkalow wrote:\n> \n> The git architecture makes the central server less important, and it's \n> easy to run your own.\n\nOn the other hand:\n\n - the git architecture is admirably suited to an _untrusted_ central\n   server, ie exactly the SourceForge kind of setup. I realize that the \n   people at SourceForge probably think they are trustworthy, but in the \n   big picture, even SF probably would prefer people to see them as a\n   _distribution_ point, not the final authority.\n\n   IOW, with git (unlike, for example CVS), you can have a useful \n   distribution point that is _not_ one that the developers have to \n   control or even necessarily want to control. Which is exactly the\n   kind of setup that would match what SF does.\n\n   So with git, developers don't have to trust SF, and if SF is down or \n   something bad happens (disk crash, bad backups, whatever), you didn't \n   \"lose\" anything - the real development wasn't being done at SF anyway, \n   it was a way to _connect_ the people who do real development.\n\n - Every developer wants to have their own history and complete source\n   control, but very few developers actually have good distribution \n   resources. \"kernel.org\" works for a few projects, and might be fine to\n   expand a bit past what it does now, but kernel.org doesn't eevn try to\n   do (nor _want_ to do, I bet) the kinds of things that SF does.\n\n   Yes, developers can just merge with each other directly, and git allows \n   that, but it's actually not very convenient - not because of git\n   itself, but because of just doing the maintenance. For example, I don't \n   allow incoming traffic to my machines, and I feel _much_ better that\n   way. No MIS, no maintenance, and much fewer security issues.\n\n   This is _exactly_ where something like SF really ends up being helpful. \n   It's a _hosting_ service, and git is eminently suitable to being \n   hosted, exactly because of its distributed approach. It needs very few \n   hosting services: you could make do with a very very limited shell \n   access, and in fact I tried to design the \"git push\" protocol so that \n   you could give people ssh \"shell\" access, where the \"shell\" was not a \n   real shell at all, but something that literally just implemented four\n   or five commands (\"git-receive-pack\" and some admin commands to do \n   things like creation/removal of whole archives etc).\n\n> Also, kernel.org is providing space to a set of people with a large\n> overlap with git users, since git hasn't been particularly publicized\n> and kernel.org is hosting git.\n\nkernel.org certainly works well enough for the few projects that use it, \nbut I don't think it's going to expand all that much. \n\nAnd it's possible that git usage won't expand all that much either. But\nquite frankly, I think git is a lot better than CVS (or even SVN) by now,\nand I wouldn't be surprised if it started getting some use outside of the\ngit-only and kernel projects once people start getting more used to it. \nAnd so I'd be thrilled to have some site like SF support it.\n\nbkbits.net used to do that for BK projects, and there were a _lot_ of \nprojects that used it. \n\n\t\tLinus\n"},{"id":"7153","messageId":"46a038f905081216013941b2c@mail.gmail.com","threadId":"1485","inReplyTo":"20050812220120.EF075353AED@atlas.denx.de","subject":"Re: [OT?] git tools at SourceForge ?","fromName":"Martin Langhoff","fromEmail":"martin.langhoff@gmail.com","sentAt":"2005-08-12T23:01:53Z","receivedAt":"2005-08-12T23:01:53Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"martin.langhoff@gmail.com","avatar":"https://gravatar.com/avatar/1e3f311b6c4c15836501901ca58f8c0b0667246488084ba524d8bc9867e22fd9?d=mp&s=160"},"body":"> > I don't think he wants sourceforge to host git, I think he'd like\n> > sourceforge to provide access to source trees via git, instead of\n> > cvs.  Read that as, I want to do:\n> \n> Correct, that's what I am looking for. My  hope  is  that  if  enough\n> people ask SF might actually provide such a service.\n\nUbuntu's 'launchpad' project is trying to do that (a SCM 'proxy' of\nsorts) with Arch/Bazaar/BazaarNG/Whatever. It takes massive ammounts\nof diskpace and computing power to be tracking external cvs/svn repos\nin your SCM format of choice. The talked abundantly about this at the\nlast Debconf in nightless helsinki.\n\nI know I will be running GIT public repos that mirror CVS repos of a\nfew large-ish projects I work on a lot, and are starting to strain\nCVS's ability to coordinate work. I am keen on starting a Wiki on\n'git/cogito' techniques and usage strategies, and my first entry is\ngoing to be about how to track an external project this way.\n\ncheers,\n\n\nmartin\n"},{"id":"7154","messageId":"Pine.LNX.4.63.0508121906130.12816@iabervon.org","threadId":"1485","inReplyTo":"Pine.LNX.4.58.0508121513530.3295@g5.osdl.org","subject":"Re: [OT?] git tools at SourceForge ?","fromName":"Daniel Barkalow","fromEmail":"barkalow@iabervon.org","sentAt":"2005-08-12T23:14:28Z","receivedAt":"2005-08-12T23:14:28Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"barkalow@iabervon.org","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/55364219?v=4"},"body":"On Fri, 12 Aug 2005, Linus Torvalds wrote:\n\n> And it's possible that git usage won't expand all that much either. But\n> quite frankly, I think git is a lot better than CVS (or even SVN) by now,\n> and I wouldn't be surprised if it started getting some use outside of the\n> git-only and kernel projects once people start getting more used to it. \n> And so I'd be thrilled to have some site like SF support it.\n\nI certainly think it's going to happen; it's just not surprising that it \nhasn't happened yet. Once there's a stable release and some publicity, I'd \nexpect SF to see it as worthwhile. But a hosting site with git-only shell \naccess needs to know what the necessary programs are going to be, which we \nhaven't committed to quite yet.\n\n\t-Daniel\n*This .sig left intentionally blank*\n"},{"id":"7155","messageId":"46a038f90508121617560d00c@mail.gmail.com","threadId":"1485","inReplyTo":"Pine.LNX.4.58.0508121513530.3295@g5.osdl.org","subject":"Re: [OT?] git tools at SourceForge ?","fromName":"Martin Langhoff","fromEmail":"martin.langhoff@gmail.com","sentAt":"2005-08-12T23:17:57Z","receivedAt":"2005-08-12T23:17:57Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"martin.langhoff@gmail.com","avatar":"https://gravatar.com/avatar/1e3f311b6c4c15836501901ca58f8c0b0667246488084ba524d8bc9867e22fd9?d=mp&s=160"},"body":">  - the git architecture is admirably suited to an _untrusted_ central\n>    server, ie exactly the SourceForge kind of setup. I realize that the\n\nDefinitely. And beyond that too. Using SF for CVS means that when SF's\nCVS service is down (often enough) you can't commit (or even fscking\ndiff) until they are back up. Every single damn operation does a\nroundtrip. This also means a huge load on their servers.\n\nI'm sure SF will be glad to see CVS fall our of favour.\n\n>    Yes, developers can just merge with each other directly\n\nI take it that you mean an exchange of patches that does not depend on\nhaving public repos. What are the mechanisms available on that front,\nother than patchbombs?\n\n>    This is _exactly_ where something like SF really ends up being helpful.\n>    It's a _hosting_ service, and git is eminently suitable to being\n\nNot sure whether SF is offering rsync, but they do support hosting of\narbitrarty data -- and a project using GIT can use that to host\nseveral developer trees . It'd be nice if SF offered gitweb and\nsimilar niceties. As my usage of GIT increases, I may add support for\nit on Eduforge.org\n\nIf I had more (hw/time) resources I'd do the git proxying of CVS\nprojects, but that's huge.\n\n> And so I'd be thrilled to have some site like SF support it.\n\nEduforge's charter is to host education-related projects, so that's\nnot a free-for-all-comers, but I'm considering git support, as our\nusage of git is growing.\n\ncheers,\n\n\n\nmartin\n"},{"id":"7156","messageId":"Pine.LNX.4.62.0508121618140.20901@qynat.qvtvafvgr.pbz","threadId":"1485","inReplyTo":"46a038f905081216013941b2c@mail.gmail.com","subject":"Re: [OT?] git tools at SourceForge ?","fromName":"David Lang","fromEmail":"david.lang@digitalinsight.com","sentAt":"2005-08-12T23:24:11Z","receivedAt":"2005-08-12T23:24:11Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"david.lang@digitalinsight.com","avatar":null},"body":"On Sat, 13 Aug 2005, Martin Langhoff wrote:\n\n>>> I don't think he wants sourceforge to host git, I think he'd like\n>>> sourceforge to provide access to source trees via git, instead of\n>>> cvs.  Read that as, I want to do:\n>>\n>> Correct, that's what I am looking for. My  hope  is  that  if  enough\n>> people ask SF might actually provide such a service.\n>\n> Ubuntu's 'launchpad' project is trying to do that (a SCM 'proxy' of\n> sorts) with Arch/Bazaar/BazaarNG/Whatever. It takes massive ammounts\n> of diskpace and computing power to be tracking external cvs/svn repos\n> in your SCM format of choice. The talked abundantly about this at the\n> last Debconf in nightless helsinki.\n\nActually, if HPA can (or has) work out the kinks for combining the object \nstores for different projects I think you will find that a site like \nsourceforge could actually find that across all their differnt projects \ngit will require significantly less space then first thought. I believe \nthat there is a significant number of files that are going to be the same \nin different project (for example COPYING, or if a project is forked, most \nof the files in a project) and therfor will just refer to the same object \nblob.\n\nnow when you start makeing packs this sort of thing can make the optimal \nlogic for deciding what's in each pack 'interesting', but as long as each \npack is self contained the rest of the git tools will handle things just \nfine.\n\nDavid Lang\n\n-- \nThere are two ways of constructing a software design. One way is to make it so simple that there are obviously no deficiencies. And the other way is to make it so complicated that there are no obvious deficiencies.\n  -- C.A.R. Hoare\n"},{"id":"7157","messageId":"Pine.LNX.4.58.0508121631420.3295@g5.osdl.org","threadId":"1485","inReplyTo":"46a038f90508121617560d00c@mail.gmail.com","subject":"Re: [OT?] git tools at SourceForge ?","fromName":"Linus Torvalds","fromEmail":"torvalds@osdl.org","sentAt":"2005-08-12T23:46:11Z","receivedAt":"2005-08-12T23:46:11Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"torvalds@linux-foundation.org","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/1024025?v=4"},"body":"\n\nOn Sat, 13 Aug 2005, Martin Langhoff wrote:\n> \n> >    Yes, developers can just merge with each other directly\n> \n> I take it that you mean an exchange of patches that does not depend on\n> having public repos. What are the mechanisms available on that front,\n> other than patchbombs?\n\nJust have a shared trusted machine.\n\nA lot of \"core\" developers end up having machines that they may not \ncontrol, and that they may not be able to use as major distribution \npoints, but that they _can_ share with others.\n\nFor example, \"master.kernel.org\" ends up being that for the kernel: you \ndon't have to have an account on master, but most of the core developers \ndo, so they can use it as a short-cut that is independent of the actual \n\"public\" site. \n\nSimilarly, some people are perfectly willing to give other trusted\ndevelopers a ssh login on their machine - and that's a perfectly fine way\nto sync repositories directly if you have even a slow DSL link. You'd \nnever want to _distribute_ the result over DSL, though.\n\nThe point being that you can certainly sync up to others without going \nthrough a public site. \n\n[ We _could_ also just send pack-files as email attachments. There's\n  nothing fundamentally wrong with doing the object discovery that\n  \"git-send-pack\" does on its own manually over email.\n\n  In other words: you could easily do something like \"Hey, I've got your\n  commit as of yesterday, ID <sha1>, can you send me your current\n  top-of-tree SHA1 name and the pack-file between the two?\" and have \n  direct git-to-git synchronization even over email.\n\n  NOTE NOTE NOTE! BK did this, with a \"bk send\" and \"bk receive\". I hated \n  it, which is why I'd never do scripts like that. But I think it's a \n  valid thing to do when you're cursing the fact that the central\n  repository is down, and has been down for five hours, and you don't know\n  how long it will take to get back up, and you don't have _any_ other\n  choices ]\n\n> >    This is _exactly_ where something like SF really ends up being helpful.\n> >    It's a _hosting_ service, and git is eminently suitable to being\n> \n> Not sure whether SF is offering rsync, but they do support hosting of\n> arbitrarty data -- and a project using GIT can use that to host\n> several developer trees.\n\nThe problem with the arbitrary data approach (and rsync) is that the git \nrepositories can get out of sync.\n\nWe haven't seen it very often on kernel.org, but we _do_ see it. I think \nI've got something like three bug reports from people saying \"your tree is \ncorrupted\" because it so happened that the mirroring was on-going at the \nsame time I did a push, and the mirroring caught an updated HEAD without \nactually having caught all of the objects that HEAD referenced.\n\nNow, all the git tools do write things in the right order, and mirror \nscripts etc _tend_ to mirror in alphabetical order (and \"objects\" come \nbefore \"refs\" ;), so you really have to hit the right window where a git \ntool updates the git repository at the same time as a mirroring sweep is \ngoing on, but it definitely _does_ happen.\n\nIt just happens seldom enough that most people haven't noticed. But if \nyou've seen the gitweb page go blank for one of the projects, you now know \nwhy it can happen..\n\nAnd this is inevitable when you have a non-git-aware server. You really \nneed to update the objects in the right order, and to get the right order \nyou do have to be git-aware.\n\n> It'd be nice if SF offered gitweb and\n> similar niceties. As my usage of GIT increases, I may add support for\n> it on Eduforge.org\n\nI think we'll find that it's a learning process, to just find out what\ndrives site managers mad (we certainly found the problem with lots of\nsmall files on kernel.org out ;). Having a few sites that do it and tell\nthe others what gotchas there are involved with it (and what scripts they\nuse for maintaining stuff like auto-packing etc) is all a learning\nexperience.\n\n\t\t\tLinus\n"},{"id":"7160","messageId":"Pine.LNX.4.63.0508122046370.12816@iabervon.org","threadId":"1485","inReplyTo":"46a038f90508121617560d00c@mail.gmail.com","subject":"Re: [OT?] git tools at SourceForge ?","fromName":"Daniel Barkalow","fromEmail":"barkalow@iabervon.org","sentAt":"2005-08-13T01:16:48Z","receivedAt":"2005-08-13T01:16:48Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"barkalow@iabervon.org","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/55364219?v=4"},"body":"On Sat, 13 Aug 2005, Martin Langhoff wrote:\n\n> >    Yes, developers can just merge with each other directly\n> \n> I take it that you mean an exchange of patches that does not depend on\n> having public repos. What are the mechanisms available on that front,\n> other than patchbombs?\n\nIf each developer has a trivial web server, they can put their output \nthere, and everyone else can pull from it, because it only needs to serve \nstatic files out of a directory structure that the programs create \nregularly. Of course, this is only strictly different from a public repo \nin that you don't advertize it beyond the other developers. But it's a \nwithin-system equivalent to posting a link to a web-hosted patch set, \nwhich people sometimes do to pass things around.\n\n> > And so I'd be thrilled to have some site like SF support it.\n> \n> Eduforge's charter is to host education-related projects, so that's\n> not a free-for-all-comers, but I'm considering git support, as our\n> usage of git is growing.\n\nIf you contribe the git support to gforge, presumably similar hosting \nsites will pick it up before too long.\n\n\t-Daniel\n*This .sig left intentionally blank*\n"}]}