[chuck-users] Hello and the state of ChucK question

Kassen signal.automatique at gmail.com
Fri Apr 8 04:28:36 EDT 2011


If the only real main difference is needing approval to work on stuff, I'd
> say Github is the way to go. If that didn't convince you, consider that Tom
> Lieber also loves (loves, loves) Git...
Ah, ok, I did need to be added to the Fluxus group on Savannah, that's true.
I'm not sure that could be set to automatic. I could also imagine that not
needing any approval of the project leader might lead to spam.

I do already love Git, it's great. IMHO it's especially good matched with
Scons ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCons ) as those two take care of
exactly those boring fidgety parts that I don't like to deal with. In case
this wasn't clear; you can use Git with sites that aren't "Github", as far
as I understand it all "GitHub" just has a "Git" in the name and a marketing
budget, you could use any other site or server, I think.

At any rate; I don't object to GitHub at all, I just like Savannah's stance
on Open Source.

PS; Tom stopped using a tiling Window Manager, now I can't take him
seriously any more :-p


Having a simple central repo, everyone can work on any number of local
> forks of the project and work on them.
> Especially with git or mercurial it is very easy to have several
> branches around (in the same or in different working directories) and
> push/pull/merge between them.
> When something gets ready to be integrated in the main project, it can
> be send as patch to one of the main developers.
> This is where github (and now savannah?) adds a different workflow.
> Yes, this is what we do exactly. I send a link to my fork a few mails back;
I can add or delete anything I like and Dave can include bits he finds
useful of those. I'm still merging in any changes to the "master" branch.

One advantage of a system like github is the public fork repository.
> The fork also gets a community process, so the code is reviewed and
> tested and discussed by the community, before it makes it's way to the
> main branch. Even the main developers can add tips and solutions to
> the fork, also to make it better fitting to the main branch.

I like that idea a lot, however I wonder how it will relate to the list.
People who aren't writing C++ may still have useful things to say about how
they would like to write ChucK. IMHO especially novice users have useful
things to say yet those might find a process like that intimidating. I hope
such a process won't go at the expense of open and inclusive debate on the
list. I also think it's quite important that the main dev team be happy
about the setup.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cs.princeton.edu/pipermail/chuck-users/attachments/20110408/2e267999/attachment.htm>

More information about the chuck-users mailing list