Page 1 of 4

Repository for the final Ominc release

PostPosted: Tue Oct 15, 2013 3:51 pm
by Ivan Denisov
People ask for "main" read-only repository with Ominc release.

Distribution is the part of "center" mission, lets perform our mission and decide about repository.

After sum up of mail list discussion I have chosen three options: GitHub, Bitbucket and Gitorious.
Google Code and SourceForge were rejected because of banning politics.
Our own repository (like Redmine) worse than public because it will not involve new people and not allowing to make easy pull-requests.

Let's continue the discussion of "center" repository! And then vote.

Re: Repository for the final Ominc release

PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2013 8:48 am
by Josef Templ
What are the advantages and disadvantages of the alternatves?

The Bitbucket welcome page says that it is free up to 5 users.
Isn't this a knock out criterion? Has anybody looked at this issue?
What about the other alternatves? Any experience with them?

Re: Repository for the final Ominc release

PostPosted: Wed Oct 16, 2013 1:30 pm
by ReneK
Back on the OMI eMail list, several variants for a repository have been mentioned. Of those mentioned there, only those three systems are in this vote that Ivan mentioned before the discussion took place. I think this is not sufficient.

What about SourceForge or Google Code which have been mentioned already? What about CVS, SVN, GNU arch, Fossil, Mercurial, Monotone or Bitkeeper? What are the needs we want to address? As long as we have no analysis of what we want the repository to do, how can we decide which product serves our needs?

(And why is it relevant that people outside the center ask for a repository, when the repository is primarily a tool for the center members and not for the Community? Right now, there is exactly one downloadable file. But of course, this is off topic).

Re: Repository for the final Ominc release

PostPosted: Fri Oct 18, 2013 6:48 am
by Josef Templ
I agree that there is not enough knowledge about the alternatives.
So it is more like guessing than voting. But where could
the knowledge come from?

Re: Repository for the final Ominc release

PostPosted: Fri Oct 18, 2013 8:36 am
by ReneK
We can analyze our needs first, and then each of us can read up on Wikipedia or wherever, probably discuss the findings here, and then vote as he believes.

Re: Repository for the final Ominc release

PostPosted: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:11 pm
by Ivan Denisov
Josef Templ wrote:The Bitbucket welcome page says that it is free up to 5 users.
Isn't this a knock out criterion? Has anybody looked at this issue?

This limit only for closed projects. For open-source there are no limits.

Re: Repository for the final Ominc release

PostPosted: Sun Oct 20, 2013 2:35 am
by Ivan Denisov
Josef Templ wrote:I agree that there is not enough knowledge about the alternatives.
So it is more like guessing than voting. But where could
the knowledge come from?

If nobody sharing experience, I let you Google, please. Any my or OberonCore or Rene interpretation will depend on our vision.

Re: DISCUSSION: Repository for the final Ominc release

PostPosted: Sat Nov 09, 2013 10:18 pm
by DGDanforth
Necessary criteria for maintaining bug free development and released systems:
o Single 'official' current release.
o Changes from this release to previous release (docu, mod).
o Candidates modules for next release.
o Individuals assigned to evaluate each candidate module.
o Current human editor who coordinates modules and testing for next release.
o List of requested changes/additions for next release.

Whatever mechanisms, github etc., that provide for those capabilities is fine with me.

-Doug Danforth

Re: DISCUSSION: Repository for the final Ominc release

PostPosted: Fri Nov 15, 2013 4:44 pm
by Robert
I have done a brief Wikipedia comparison of the three suggestions, and, for not very good reasons, would order them:
1 - GitHub, 2- Gitorious, 3 - Bitbucket. I guess GitHub wins because it is already the most popular.

Unless someone with real knowledge gives reasons for preferring one, it seems better to just take a chance, and make a vote fairly soon.

I think it is more important to make progress on establishing a stable reference BlackBox 1.6 that the community uses and respects, than to
spend too long deciding what is the very best tools to use, especially if they are only marginally better than the next best.

Regards - Robert

Re: DISCUSSION: Repository for the final Ominc release

PostPosted: Wed Nov 20, 2013 4:17 pm
by Ivan Denisov
A month ago I have made a demo in GitHub
https://github.com/bbfw-center
It looks nice. I am not an experienced user of GitHub, I can not say much. Romiras is more experienced with it and gave his recommendation.

That is how the repository looks in BitBucket
https://bitbucket.org/oberoncore/blackbox
ObeonCore push 1.6 versions for their needs.
I think, the reasons is that they prefer Mercurial in spite of Git.

I do not know which service is better, but I prefer GIT because it has odc-to-binary converter essential for BlackBox development and Redmine integration.

However, I do not recommend Gitorious because have bad experience with archive extracting feature and their web-site works very slow from Russia.