|
Replies:
17
-
Last Post:
Feb 17, 2006 6:29 AM
by: richlowe
|
|
|
Stephen Hahn
sch@eng.sun.com
|
|
|
|
Distributed SCM candidates
Posted:
Dec 1, 2005 2:01 PM
|
|
There are a bunch of distributed SCMs out there. My initial
candidate list is
- Bazaar NG (bzr),
- Mercurial (hg),
- Monotone,
- SVK, and
- TeamWare
(I would/will add darcs if I can get GHC working on Solaris x86/x64.)
Links to the open source projects for these SCMs, as well as some
other references, are available at
http://del.icio.us/sch/scm
If you like a particular candidate, have an amusing or distressing
anecdote about any of these, or think we've missed an important
candidate... speak up.
- Stephen
--
Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems
stephen dot hahn at sun dot com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/
_______________________________________________
tools-discuss mailing list
tools-discuss at opensolaris dot org
|
|
|
Posts:
35
From:
US
Registered:
6/17/05
|
|
|
|
Re: Distributed SCM candidates
Posted:
Dec 1, 2005 4:51 PM
in response to: Stephen Hahn
|
|
> There are a bunch of distributed SCMs out there.
> My initial candidate list is
>
> - Bazaar NG (bzr),
> - Mercurial (hg),
> - Monotone,
> - SVK, and
> - TeamWare
I have a dumb question, Teamware isn't open source, is it?
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen Hahn
sch@eng.sun.com
|
|
|
|
Re: Re: Distributed SCM candidates
Posted:
Dec 1, 2005 5:00 PM
in response to: dschanen
|
|
* David P. Schanen <david dot schanen at gmail dot com> [2005-12-01 16:52]:
> > There are a bunch of distributed SCMs out there.
> > My initial candidate list is
> >
> > - Bazaar NG (bzr),
> > - Mercurial (hg),
> > - Monotone,
> > - SVK, and
> > - TeamWare
>
> I have a dumb question, Teamware isn't open source, is it?
Not at present. One intermediate outcome of the evaluation could be
for OpenSolaris to ask about/sponsor/accelerate any plans to open source
TeamWare, depending on how it was doing with respect to the other
requirements. (So we can do lazy evaluation on that point as a
special case.)
- Stephen
--
Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems
stephen dot hahn at sun dot com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/
_______________________________________________
tools-discuss mailing list
tools-discuss at opensolaris dot org
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
53
From:
Registered:
3/9/05
|
|
|
|
Re: Re: Distributed SCM candidates
Posted:
Feb 16, 2006 8:29 PM
in response to: Stephen Hahn
|
|
I know that "OpenTeamware" project has achieved its milestone 1 (please, see the
announcement below; it was sent to openteamware-interest at sun dot com alias).
The binaries and sources are available for internal use. Standard TeamWare tests
show that the quality of the binaries is good (there are several failed tests, but they
are not critical), so these binaries can be used as a candidate for contest.
This version is expected to show very good performance in "update" transactions,
especially in case the workspace is large, and the changes are small (less than 10%).
----------------------------------------- Original Message ------------------------------------
Subject: update: the Open Teamware "Milestone #1" release is now available
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 01:06:58 -0800
From: David Chenevert <David dot Chenevert at Sun dot COM>
To: openteamware-interest at sun dot com
The Open Teamware "Milestone #1" release is now available, for
both Intel-Solaris and SPARC-Solaris platforms. (NOTE: This
announcement has gone out before, but not to as wide
an audience. Also, source code is now provided for this release.)
The release includes a ready-to-use install directory,
with binaries, and a source-code development environment.
Makefiles and "README"s are provided to modify
and/or rebuild all command-line tools (source for the GUI
TeamWare tools are will also be provided in a future release).
If you are interested in using this release, read on. If at
any time you need assistance, have questions, or wish to provide
feedback, feel free to contact me directly:
CHENEVERT, DAVID david dot chenevert at sun dot com UMPK16-303
Note that stability level of this release is pre-Alpha. It is intended
to be shaken-down by one or more "friendly" users. In other words,
you should only consider using this release if all the following
criteria are met:
a. You should already be a regular TeamWare user.
b. As with any early access software, these tools are prone to have
one or more defects. Make sure you have a fallback plan (for
example, a backup copy of a workspace that you putback or
bringover to), in case one of these defects "breaks" one of your
workspaces.
c. It should be convenient for you to install a new copy of
TeamWare, and start using this copy instead of the TeamWare
you're currently running.
d. It should be easy for you to reverse step (c) above, in case
you have problems with this release, or, in any case, when it
becomes obsolete.
Having said all that... Thanks for your consideration!
The files for this release are available at sunsource.net, in the
"tomahawktest" project.
If you don't already have an account at sunsource.net, you will need to
register:
a. Direct your browser to sunsource.net, and click
on the "register" link in the upper right hand corner.
b. You will need to choose a username, and provide your email address.
c. Once you have registered, you will be emailed a link which
allows you to set up your password. Do this, and then read and
approve the "Usage Agreement."
At this point you will have a valid SunSource account.
Send email to cynthia dot wright at sun dot com, asking for your SunSource
username to be added to the tomahawktest project, as an "Observer".
Once this request is approved, you'll be able to log in and get the
release files.
Log in to your account on sunsource.net. Bring up
the "tomahawktest" home page, which is found at
"My pages" -> "My start page" -> My projects / "tomahawktest"
From the "tomahawktest" home page, the files are found at:
Project tools / "Documents & files" -> "tomahawktest" -> "milestone1"
Four files are provided:
ms1-announcement.txt
this document
ms1-releasenotes.txt
guide to installing and using the release
ms1-intel-S2.tar.gz
ms1-sparc-S2.tar.gz
intel and SPARC versions of the release itself
Please report any problems or requests to:
openteamware-help at sun dot com
----------------------------------------------------------------------------- --
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
1,710
From:
NZ
Registered:
4/27/05
|
|
|
|
Re: Re: Re: Distributed SCM candidates
Posted:
Feb 16, 2006 9:58 PM
in response to: nikm
|
|
Nikolay Molchanov wrote:
>I know that "OpenTeamware" project has achieved its milestone 1 (please, see the
>announcement below; it was sent to openteamware-interest at sun dot com alias).
>The binaries and sources are available for internal use. Standard TeamWare tests
>show that the quality of the binaries is good (there are several failed tests, but they
>are not critical), so these binaries can be used as a candidate for contest.
>This version is expected to show very good performance in "update" transactions,
>especially in case the workspace is large, and the changes are small (less than 10%).
>
>
Is it going public? It's almost a year since was first mooted during
the pilot.
Ian
_______________________________________________
tools-discuss mailing list
tools-discuss at opensolaris dot org
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen Hahn
sch@eng.sun.com
|
|
|
|
Re: Re: Re: Distributed SCM candidates
Posted:
Feb 17, 2006 12:48 AM
in response to: nikm
|
|
* Nikolay Molchanov <Nikolay dot Molchanov at Sun dot COM> [2006-02-16 20:30]:
> I know that "OpenTeamware" project has achieved its milestone 1 (please, see the
> announcement below; it was sent to openteamware-interest at sun dot com alias).
> The binaries and sources are available for internal use. Standard TeamWare tests
> show that the quality of the binaries is good (there are several failed tests, but they
> are not critical), so these binaries can be used as a candidate for contest.
> This version is expected to show very good performance in "update" transactions,
> especially in case the workspace is large, and the changes are small (less than 10%).
The appropriate next step would be to submit an assessment against the
existing requirements document. For myself, I am curious about E2
(transports other than NFS), E4 (directory operations in particular),
C8 (community development plan), C10 (non-mail-based hooks), and C11
(identification of partially successful operations), with respect to
the binaries made available in this release.
- Stephen
_______________________________________________
tools-discuss mailing list
tools-discuss at opensolaris dot org
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
770
From:
US
Registered:
6/17/05
|
|
|
|
Re: Re: Re: Distributed SCM candidates
Posted:
Feb 17, 2006 6:29 AM
in response to: Stephen Hahn
|
|
Stephen Hahn wrote:
> * Nikolay Molchanov <Nikolay dot Molchanov at Sun dot COM> [2006-02-16 20:30]:
>> I know that "OpenTeamware" project has achieved its milestone 1 (please, see the
>> announcement below; it was sent to openteamware-interest at sun dot com alias).
>> The binaries and sources are available for internal use. Standard TeamWare tests
>> show that the quality of the binaries is good (there are several failed tests, but they
>> are not critical), so these binaries can be used as a candidate for contest.
>> This version is expected to show very good performance in "update" transactions,
>> especially in case the workspace is large, and the changes are small (less than 10%).
>
> The appropriate next step would be to submit an assessment against the
> existing requirements document. For myself, I am curious about E2
> (transports other than NFS), E4 (directory operations in particular),
> C8 (community development plan), C10 (non-mail-based hooks), and C11
> (identification of partially successful operations), with respect to
> the binaries made available in this release.
>
> - Stephen
>
While I appreciate the previous mention of evaluating TeamWare without
the "Open Source" constraint until such a time as it matters. I think
that in order to sensibly be considered a candidate to any degree,
binaries need to be available to those of us outside Sun, so that we can
evaluate it.
-- Rich.
_______________________________________________
tools-discuss mailing list
tools-discuss at opensolaris dot org
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
5
From:
FRANCE
Registered:
12/2/05
|
|
|
|
Re: Distributed SCM candidates
Posted:
Dec 2, 2005 1:41 AM
in response to: Stephen Hahn
|
|
I've been watching many DVCS for quite a number of months now and after settling on Mercurial for its speed, smallness and nice community, I decided to write a paper about migrating FreeBSD from CVS/P4 to Mercurial. The paper has been published & presented at EuroBSDCon 2005 in Basel, CH. You think you can find some elements to help you decide in the paper...
<http://.
Cheers,
Ollivier
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen Hahn
sch@eng.sun.com
|
|
|
|
Re: Re: Distributed SCM candidates
Posted:
Dec 2, 2005 3:07 PM
in response to: keltia
|
|
* Ollivier Robert <keltia at gmail dot com> [2005-12-02 01:42]:
> I've been watching many DVCS for quite a number of months now and after settling on Mercurial for its speed, smallness and nice community, I decided to write a paper about migrating FreeBSD from CVS/P4 to Mercurial. The paper has been published & presented at EuroBSDCon 2005 in Basel, CH. You think you can find some elements to help you decide in the paper...
> <http://.
Thanks very much for the reference; I'll have a look.
- Stephen
--
Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems
stephen dot hahn at sun dot com http://blogs.sun.com/sch/
_______________________________________________
tools-discuss mailing list
tools-discuss at opensolaris dot org
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
68
From:
Registered:
12/11/05
|
|
|
|
Re: Distributed SCM candidates
Posted:
Dec 21, 2005 6:36 AM
in response to: Stephen Hahn
|
|
> There are a bunch of distributed SCMs out there. My initial
> candidate list is
>
> - Bazaar NG (bzr),
> - Mercurial (hg),
> - Monotone,
> - SVK, and
> - TeamWare
>
> (I would/will add darcs if I can get GHC working on Solaris x86/x64.)
Success yet?
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
22
From:
Sydney, Australia
Registered:
8/10/05
|
|
|
|
Re: Distributed SCM candidates
Posted:
Dec 21, 2005 4:02 PM
in response to: Stephen Hahn
|
|
Any reason why subversion isn't a candidate? Many open source projects use subversion these days, so there is a fair bit of support out there compared to something like monotone. Subversion runs fine on Solaris.
http://subversion.tigris.org/
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
22
From:
Sydney, Australia
Registered:
8/10/05
|
|
|
|
Re: Distributed SCM candidates
Posted:
Dec 22, 2005 3:49 AM
in response to: luked
|
|
Okay, now I've realised that you're only interested in distributed SCMs and I've even found your requirements document. I'm still curious about the requirement that the SCM be distributed; sure it's a nice feature, but is it really an absolutely necessary feature? What if all the available distributed SCMs were inferior in other ways to an SCM with a central repository? Shouldn't all relevant advantages and disadvantages be taken into consideration?
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Kupfer
kupfer@athyra.sfbay....
|
|
|
|
Re: Re: Distributed SCM candidates
Posted:
Dec 22, 2005 9:18 AM
in response to: luked
|
|
>>>>> "Luke" == luke <luke at deller dot id dot au> writes:
Luke> I'm still curious about the requirement that the SCM be
Luke> distributed; sure it's a nice feature, but is it really an
Luke> absolutely necessary feature?
Adam Leventhal has a nice writeup of why it's important to have a
distributed SCM.
http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/ahl?entry=opensolaris_and_subversion
mike
_______________________________________________
tools-discuss mailing list
tools-discuss at opensolaris dot org
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
1,710
From:
NZ
Registered:
4/27/05
|
|
|
|
Re: Distributed SCM candidates
Posted:
Jan 6, 2006 6:29 PM
in response to: Stephen Hahn
|
|
Stephen Hahn wrote:
> There are a bunch of distributed SCMs out there. My initial
> candidate list is
>
> - Bazaar NG (bzr),
> - Mercurial (hg),
> - Monotone,
> - SVK, and
> - TeamWare
>
>
>
During the pilot (and after, off list) , there were several discussions
regarding open sourcing TeamWare and adding the required functionality
to make it a try distributed SCM.
Is this this still and option?
Ian
_______________________________________________
tools-discuss mailing list
tools-discuss at opensolaris dot org
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
69
From:
Registered:
6/15/05
|
|
|
|
Re: Distributed SCM candidates
Posted:
Jan 9, 2006 10:28 AM
in response to: ian
|
|
Not sure if someone answered this, but my understanding... (others may
have better information)
Yes, if adopted by OpenSolaris, open sourcing Teamware would seem to be
the next logical step.
/kso
Kuldip Oberoi
Product Line Manager, Sun Studio
Sun Microsystems, Inc.
650.786.0149 (x80149)
Ian Collins wrote:
> Stephen Hahn wrote:
>
>> There are a bunch of distributed SCMs out there. My initial
>> candidate list is
>> - Bazaar NG (bzr),
>> - Mercurial (hg),
>> - Monotone,
>> - SVK, and
>> - TeamWare
>>
>>
> During the pilot (and after, off list) , there were several
> discussions regarding open sourcing TeamWare and adding the required
> functionality to make it a try distributed SCM.
> Is this this still and option?
>
> Ian
> _______________________________________________
> tools-discuss mailing list
> tools-discuss at opensolaris dot org
_______________________________________________
tools-discuss mailing list
tools-discuss at opensolaris dot org
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
1,901
From:
NZ
Registered:
6/16/05
|
|
|
|
Re: Distributed SCM candidates
Posted:
Jan 28, 2006 11:52 AM
in response to: Stephen Hahn
|
|
On Thu, 2005-12-01 at 14:01 -0800, Stephen Hahn wrote:
> There are a bunch of distributed SCMs out there. My initial
> candidate list is
>
> - Bazaar NG (bzr),
> - Mercurial (hg),
> - Monotone,
> - SVK, and
> - TeamWare
It was rather interesting to hear discussion at linux.conf.au last week
about the various SCM solutions out there, and in particular, the
experiences of the kernel hackers.
- Mercurial isn't anywhere near 1.0, and will invariably need
a flag day [at least one] before it gets there
- Most people are using Cogito wrapped around GIT layer, and
announcements are frequently being made for the need for
people to compress their trees because of space limitations
I wonder if it's worth trying to get some experiences from the Linux
side of things - I'm sure we all have a few connections there.
Unfortunately I didn't get to see some of the tutorials [1] as there
were usually desktop related talks on at the same time. Hopefully the
streams will be available in the near future.
Glynn
[1] From CVS to Subversion to SVK, and SVL - Tutorial
GIT/Cogito Tutorial - Useage, migrating from CVS and Arch
bazaar-ng - friendly distributed version control
_______________________________________________
tools-discuss mailing list
tools-discuss at opensolaris dot org
|
|
|
|
|
Posts:
852
From:
GB
Registered:
3/9/05
|
|
|
|
Re: Distributed SCM candidates
Posted:
Jan 29, 2006 10:47 AM
in response to: gman
|
|
On Sun, Jan 29, 2006 at 08:52:32AM +1300, Glynn Foster wrote:
> - Mercurial isn't anywhere near 1.0, and will invariably need
> a flag day [at least one] before it gets there
Note the former part of this statement doesn't really match up with the
developer's plans:
http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/index.cgi/RoadMap
regards,
john
_______________________________________________
tools-discuss mailing list
tools-discuss at opensolaris dot org
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen Hahn
sch@eng.sun.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
