Is this an appropriate list for general git questions

Is this an appropriate list for general git questions

[Scott Haneda]

Hello Git users, 

I am 100% new to git.  Very new to any form of version control at all.  Unless you call keeping directories around, or rsync'd versions a version control system :)

I subscribed to this list yesterday, because the short description and some of the messages in the archives led me to believe that it was the correct place for beginner and intro questions regarding git usage.

I have seen there are a lot of patches, diffs, and what appear to be development related posts on this list.  Am I in the correct place?  If not, can someone point me in the right direction?

** - My question if appropriate - ** 
My needs are simple.  I do some scripting, some coding, web development etc.  I try my best to take what I have done and release it back out to the public.  This has become something that takes too much effort.

My general steps are
1) Create project, code, snippet, whatever
2) Write a read me, install notes, etc
3) Maintain a change log of some form
4) Deploy on my system, and other systems I am in control of

At that point, I have to make a decision.  Pack it all up, tar it, and put it online, perhaps on my website, or perhaps announce it on twitter, or a relevant mailing list.  Of I make a change, even a one character change, I have to update the distribution that is on my website.  There could be links to it I forgot about that would contain an older broken version.  It may also be a simple 30 line bash script, it may not even get a version number, it is a quick hack.

I am thinking github is going to be where I put all this stuff, but I am completely lost on where to even begin with all this.  I watched a few of the videos on the kernel.org website, and will continue with the git tutorials and documentation.

The second reason I came to this list is that I am a Mac user, and some of the tools I have created are resource fork dependent.  If they are ftp'd they will be broken.  Rsync is the only tool I know of that can accurately transfer the files without destroying them.  However, this requires a custom patched version of rsync, and must be equal on both ends.  I am not sure git hub is going to have that patch applied.  I may be getting into git hub specifics here, and going outside of the lists scope being focussed on git, if I am, plesae let me know and I can find a git hub resource.

I am just one person, with some rather small and hackish things that I am looking to put out there in case someone else has any interest in them.   I do not expect anyone to contribute to my work, or do anything other than *maybe* consume it.  I see a lot of people use SourceForge for this type of thing.  I wanted to try to get ahead of the curve and at least learn something that may help me down the road; git seemed to fit that bill.  At the very least, I can use it locally and just push my files around locally, keeping versions on my own machine in a way that I can step back if I screw up.

Suggestions, comments, and any general help are most appreciated.
Thanks everyone
-- 
Scott * If you contact me off list replace talklists@ with scott@ * 

Re: Is this an appropriate list for general git questions

[Avery Pennarun]

On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 6:59 PM, Scott Haneda <talklists@newgeo.com> wrote:
> I have seen there are a lot of patches, diffs, and what appear to be
> development related posts on this list.  Am I in the correct place?
> If not, can someone point me in the right direction?

There's only one official git mailing list, so that's what you get.  I
think the rule of thumb for mailing lists is: if you can't answer your
questions in ten seconds using a Google search, then you're pretty
safe asking on a mailing list.  It looks like you're safe.

By the way, this mailing list accepts posts from non-subscribers, and
it's the policy on the list to always cc: everyone who has replied to
a message in that thread so far, including the original poster.  The
idea is that you can ask a question about git without *having* to
subscribe to read all the other stuff.  But of course, reading some of
the other stuff will make you a more competent git user pretty fast,
so it might be worth it anyway.

> ** - My question if appropriate - **
> My needs are simple.  I do some scripting, some coding, web
> development etc.  I try my best to take what I have done and
> release it back out to the public.  This has become something
> that takes too much effort.

Yup, sounds like you need version control.

> At that point, I have to make a decision.  Pack it all up, tar it, and put
> it online, perhaps on my website, or perhaps announce it on twitter, or
> a relevant mailing list.  Of I make a change, even a one character change,
> I have to update the distribution that is on my website.  There could be
> links to it I forgot about that would contain an older broken version.  It may
> also be a simple 30 line bash script, it may not even get a version number, it is a quick hack.

I think you're right to consider Github for this choice.  It's about
100x more sane than sourceforge, and you can go from start to
release+tarball in one step: it gives viewers the ability to create
tarballs from any version automatically.  If you use 'git tag' (to tag
specific versions as "done") then it'll be even easier for people to
find later.

> I am thinking github is going to be where I put all this stuff, but I am
> completely lost on where to even begin with all this.  I watched a few
> of the videos on the kernel.org website, and will continue with the
> git tutorials and documentation.

You should probably look at getting a good book on version control.
You can find *these* using Google, including free online ones, now
that you know this is what you should do :)

> The second reason I came to this list is that I am a Mac user,
> and some of the tools I have created are resource fork dependent.
> If they are ftp'd they will be broken.  Rsync is the only tool I know
> of that can accurately transfer the files without destroying them.
> However, this requires a custom patched version of rsync, and
> must be equal on both ends.  I am not sure git hub is going to
> have that patch applied.  I may be getting into git hub specifics
> here, and going outside of the lists scope being focussed on git,
> if I am, plesae let me know and I can find a git hub resource.

github just does what git does, only with a friendly web interface.
git doesn't support fancy xattrs or resource forks, at least without
using add-on tools.  This is because source code almost never *needs*
these resource forks: only finished products do, and those are usually
built *from* the source code.  As part of the build process, you add
the resource forks and xattrs onto the completed files.

Also, your repository wouldn't work on non-Mac computers if git stored
that kind of stuff internally.

Your best bet is to have a simple Makefile or build script that does
everything that's necessary.  There are a couple of tools out there
that claim to support attrs and xattrs (for example, metastore), but
at least in metastore's case I don't see any evidence that it supports
resource forks.

Have fun,

Avery

Re: Is this an appropriate list for general git questions

[Scott Haneda]

On Mar 21, 2010, at 5:36 PM, Avery Pennarun wrote:

> On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 6:59 PM, Scott Haneda <talklists@newgeo.com> wrote:
> 
>> I have seen there are a lot of patches, diffs, and what appear to be
>> development related posts on this list.  Am I in the correct place?
>>  If not, can someone point me in the right direction?
> 
> There's only one official git mailing list, so that's what you get.  I
> think the rule of thumb for mailing lists is: if you can't answer your
> questions in ten seconds using a Google search, then you're pretty
> safe asking on a mailing list.  It looks like you're safe.

Phew :)

> By the way, this mailing list accepts posts from non-subscribers, and
> it's the policy on the list to always cc: everyone who has replied to
> a message in that thread so far, including the original poster.  The
> idea is that you can ask a question about git without *having* to
> subscribe to read all the other stuff.  But of course, reading some of
> the other stuff will make you a more competent git user pretty fast,
> so it might be worth it anyway.

Interesting, I have never once in 15+ years of mailing lists, seen a list work this way.  Pretty nice to not have to subscribe.  Amazing that there is not spam all over this list.

>> I am thinking github is going to be where I put all this stuff, but I am
>> completely lost on where to even begin with all this.  I watched a few
>> of the videos on the kernel.org website, and will continue with the
>> git tutorials and documentation.
> 
> You should probably look at getting a good book on version control.
> You can find *these* using Google, including free online ones, now
> that you know this is what you should do :)

Ok, I will look into it.  I am really hoping there is a "4 command to using git" type of thing.  I think I even heard that Joel Spoolsky guy state something along those lines; that he has gotten by with version control on 4 commands.  I can not remember if it was git he was referring to though.

My needs are so simple, I was hoping to not have to dig too deep, and conquer the complicated things as they come up.  Sort of like using a new text editor for the first time, there really is no learning curve to get started, you just start typing.  When you want syntax highlightig, you solve that and move on.

Can git not be treated in that way?  Is git a little steeper in the "get going" phase post installation?  I was hoping compiling it for OS X to be installed where I want it would be the hardest part :)

>> The second reason I came to this list is that I am a Mac user,
>> and some of the tools I have created are resource fork dependent.
>> If they are ftp'd they will be broken.  Rsync is the only tool I know
>> of that can accurately transfer the files without destroying them.
>> However, this requires a custom patched version of rsync, and
>> must be equal on both ends.  I am not sure git hub is going to
>> have that patch applied.  I may be getting into git hub specifics
>> here, and going outside of the lists scope being focussed on git,
>> if I am, plesae let me know and I can find a git hub resource.
> 
> github just does what git does, only with a friendly web interface.
> git doesn't support fancy xattrs or resource forks, at least without
> using add-on tools.  This is because source code almost never *needs*
> these resource forks: only finished products do, and those are usually
> built *from* the source code.  As part of the build process, you add
> the resource forks and xattrs onto the completed files.

Yes, very true, except in the case of AppleScripts and Automator actions.  Which can be "compiled" and finished apps, but also can be raw source files.  However, I believe that even those, being that they run in their own development environment, have resources and other attributes that have to be maintained.

> Also, your repository wouldn't work on non-Mac computers if git stored
> that kind of stuff internally.

In my case, I have no intention of using my repo on anything but Mac.  But I can get past just not putting AppleScript and Automator actions into my repo.  Who knows, it may work. I will ftp a source automator action and see if when I pull it back down, it is broken, or if it works.

> Your best bet is to have a simple Makefile or build script that does
> everything that's necessary.  There are a couple of tools out there
> that claim to support attrs and xattrs (for example, metastore), but
> at least in metastore's case I don't see any evidence that it supports
> resource forks.

I will take a look, thank you very much.
-- 
Scott * If you contact me off list replace talklists@ with scott@ * 

Re: Is this an appropriate list for general git questions

[Avery Pennarun]

On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 4:07 AM, Scott Haneda <talklists@newgeo.com> wrote:
> On Mar 21, 2010, at 5:36 PM, Avery Pennarun wrote:
>> By the way, this mailing list accepts posts from non-subscribers, and
>> it's the policy on the list to always cc: everyone who has replied to
>> a message in that thread so far, including the original poster.  The
>> idea is that you can ask a question about git without *having* to
>> subscribe to read all the other stuff.  But of course, reading some of
>> the other stuff will make you a more competent git user pretty fast,
>> so it might be worth it anyway.
>
> Interesting, I have never once in 15+ years of mailing lists, seen a list work this
> way.  Pretty nice to not have to subscribe.  Amazing that there is not spam all over this list.

I'm guessing they just use a good spam scanner.

>> You should probably look at getting a good book on version control.
>> You can find *these* using Google, including free online ones, now
>> that you know this is what you should do :)
>
> Ok, I will look into it.  I am really hoping there is a "4 command to using
> git" type of thing.  I think I even heard that Joel Spolsky guy state
> something along those lines; that he has gotten by with version control
> on 4 commands.  I can not remember if it was git he was referring to though.

No, it was mercurial.  As I recall, he then went on to decide that
trying to use it with only four commands wasn't the right approach and
you should actually learn about it, and wrote a series of tutorials.

It's generally agreed (though perhaps not among everyone on this list
:)) that mercurial is easier to learn at first than git.  However, in
my experience, once you've spent the time to learn how git works, you
also gain a lot more than with any other system.  It's ridiculously
powerful, in the same way that Unix is powerful.

Then again, if you're running on a Mac, there are some GUI-based git
tools available.  I've heard good things about GitX, though I haven't
tried it myself.

>> source code almost never *needs*
>> these resource forks: only finished products do, and those are usually
>> built *from* the source code.  As part of the build process, you add
>> the resource forks and xattrs onto the completed files.
>
> Yes, very true, except in the case of AppleScripts and Automator actions.
> Which can be "compiled" and finished apps, but also can be raw source files.
> However, I believe that even those, being that they run in their own development
> environment, have resources and other attributes that have to be maintained.

As I understand it, almost everything in OS X avoids requiring
resource forks nowadays.  You'll probably be okay.

Have fun,

Avery

Re: Is this an appropriate list for general git questions

[Scott Haneda]

On Mar 27, 2010, at 3:29 PM, Avery Pennarun wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 4:07 AM, Scott Haneda <talklists@newgeo.com> wrote:
>> On Mar 21, 2010, at 5:36 PM, Avery Pennarun wrote:
>>> You should probably look at getting a good book on version control.
>>> You can find *these* using Google, including free online ones, now
>>> that you know this is what you should do :)
>> 
>> Ok, I will look into it.  I am really hoping there is a "4 command to using
>> git" type of thing.  I think I even heard that Joel Spolsky guy state
>> something along those lines; that he has gotten by with version control
>> on 4 commands.  I can not remember if it was git he was referring to though.
> 
> No, it was mercurial.  As I recall, he then went on to decide that
> trying to use it with only four commands wasn't the right approach and
> you should actually learn about it, and wrote a series of tutorials.

Ha, you have a good memory :)

> It's generally agreed (though perhaps not among everyone on this list
> :)) that mercurial is easier to learn at first than git.  However, in
> my experience, once you've spent the time to learn how git works, you
> also gain a lot more than with any other system.  It's ridiculously
> powerful, in the same way that Unix is powerful.

Good, I should eventually feel at home then.  I may use Mac OS X, but I certainly treat it like any other *nix I admin.  That is part of this, all the maintenance, helper, and other scripts I have created and culled over the years, need a place to go.

I am tired of the excessive comments in my files, with time and date stamps, and commenting out a chunk of code, but not deleting it because I need it as a point of reference to tell myself down the road WTF I was thinking.  Git should help me clean that all up and have a nice code only file, with revisions I can go back through to answer any questions about why I did something in the past.

> Then again, if you're running on a Mac, there are some GUI-based git
> tools available.  I've heard good things about GitX, though I haven't
> tried it myself.

I think I am going to stay away for the GUI tools.  I always regret using them.  I end up on some other machine, in some other shell, in some other session, and do not have the tools with me.  I have found it most beneficial to be able to be functional in a shell, which is more or less the same no matter what platform I am on as long as it is not Windows.  I stuff my bash profiles in a place where I can get to them, and that usually works for me.  That is another thing I could put in git as well.

>>> source code almost never *needs*
>>> these resource forks: only finished products do, and those are usually
>>> built *from* the source code.  As part of the build process, you add
>>> the resource forks and xattrs onto the completed files.
>> 
>> Yes, very true, except in the case of AppleScripts and Automator actions.
>>  Which can be "compiled" and finished apps, but also can be raw source files.
>>  However, I believe that even those, being that they run in their own development
>> environment, have resources and other attributes that have to be maintained.
> 
> As I understand it, almost everything in OS X avoids requiring
> resource forks nowadays.  You'll probably be okay.

*Almost* being the key word. :)  The things that do use them, rely on them heavily, and cause me great headaches.  But yes as of 10.6, there is a major push to get away from resource forks.  Though I do not see extended attributes going away any time soon.  However, some softwares are just too legacy, and developers either too stubborn, or too set in a code base that is too hard to manage to get out of resource forks.  I know of one software, that I believe that if resource forks were EOL'd, that developer would probably bring them back by writing his own resource fork management tools within the app.

At any rate, thank you very much for all your advice and pointers.  Sounds like I just need to jump in and start using git.  I can look at git hub later if and when I want to publicly distribute my work.  First step, get up to speed on the commands I need to know to at least check in and how to step a few revisions back if need be.

Thank you so much.
-- 
Scott * If you contact me off list replace talklists@ with scott@ * 

Re: Is this an appropriate list for general git questions

[Miles Bader]

Scott Haneda <talklists@newgeo.com> writes:
>> By the way, this mailing list accepts posts from non-subscribers, and
>> it's the policy on the list to always cc: everyone who has replied to
>> a message in that thread so far, including the original poster.  The
>> idea is that you can ask a question about git without *having* to
>> subscribe to read all the other stuff.  But of course, reading some
>> of the other stuff will make you a more competent git user pretty
>> fast, so it might be worth it anyway.
>
> Interesting, I have never once in 15+ years of mailing lists, seen a
> list work this way.  Pretty nice to not have to subscribe.  Amazing
> that there is not spam all over this list.

"Subscribers-only" lists are a fairly recent aberration.

-Miles

-- 
Logic, n. The art of thinking and reasoning in strict accordance with the
limitations and incapacities of the human misunderstanding.