[nycbug-talk] Fwd: Fwd: svn - but smaller?

Wed Jan 23 13:05:06 EST 2013

Meant to send to everyone

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Justin Dearing <zippy1981 at gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:04 PM
Subject: Re: [nycbug-talk] Fwd: svn - but smaller?
To: Isaac Levy <ike at blackskyresearch.net>

Hey,

Has FreeBSD evaluated Fossil as a SCM possibility? http://www.fossil-scm.org.
Its written by the author of SQLite and seems to be his "me too" version of
git/hg. I've not use it except for RO access to the .NET driver for SQLite.
The only reason I bring it up is because due to the license and size of the
code, that its something that could feasibly be included in FreeBSD proper.

Other than license, the one feature that impressed me about it was that the
fossil executable was an embedded web server that not only served as a
server for syncing source code, and providing a human readable view of the
source code in the browser (like hg), it had a full wiki and bug tracking
system.

Justin

On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 12:33 PM, Isaac Levy <ike at blackskyresearch.net>wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> I'm sorry to cross-post, but the conversation below has been brewing with
> a number of us, and I wanted to highlight it.
>
> Best,
> .ike
>
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> > From: "Isaac (.ike) Levy" <ike at blackskyresearch.net>
> > Subject: Re: svn - but smaller?
> > Date: January 23, 2013 12:05:25 PM EST
> > To: freebsd-stable at freebsd.org
> > Cc: Mike Tancsa <mike at sentex.net>, Mike Leone <
> mike.leone at axialmarket.com>
> >
> > One of my teammates and I were just doing a write up on this very issue,
> >
> > On Jan 23, 2013, at 10:55 AM, Mike Tancsa wrote:
> >> On 1/23/2013 10:37 AM, Oliver Brandmueller wrote:
> >>>
> >>> But my main concern is the system sources anyway. freebsd-update is not
> >>> feasible for me, as described in the original post.
> >>>
> >> Actually, if you build the port minus the NEON option, its as bad in
> >> terms of dependencies.
> >
> > --------
> > THE UGLY
> >
> > Source for SVN:         496M (+)
> > Source for FreeBSD 9.1: 746M (actual)
> >
> > (df output details below)
> >
> > -------
> > THE BAD
> >
> > After 15+ years of FreeBSD use, I remember what a great thing cvsup was
> when it hit.
> > However, SVN presents several problems for OS use (again):
> >
> > 1) License.  Many of SVN's dependencies will never be available in the
> FreeBSD source.
> > While this is totally OK for development, SVN is 3rd party software,
> this is unacceptable to force as 'the' respected path for OS source builds.
> >
> > 2) Heft: cvsup/csup was excellent for 1 thing: grabbing a REL branch.
>  Perhaps grabbing STABLE or CURRENT.  Systems administrators could QA/test
> new branches on massive numbers of servers quickly and efficiently.
> >
> > --------
> > THE GOOD
> >
> > We've just resolved this for ourselves, and are wrapping it in a clean
> sh script:
> > (I'd love to know where we can send it for input when we're done?)
> >
> > 40 lines of shell could get the jist of what users really need:
> >
> > - Download the src using fetch(1)
> >  fetch
> ftp://ftp.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD/releases/amd64/9.1-RELEASE/src.txz
> > - Extract the tarball (to /usr/src, or wherever).
> >  tar -xf src.txz
> >
> > We're hacking out some simple script add-ons out right now for
> ourselves, to make this more CVSUP like:
> > + flag to keep source tarball somewhere (instead of merely un-tarring it
> in a pipe)
> > + flag to un-tar source to a particular directory
> > + flag to specify OS version
> > + flag to specify RELEASE, STABLE, CURRENT
> >  (if they exist, CURRENT may be tricky?)
> > + define source server/mirror
> >
> > + source config in /etc, (or rc.conf ?), if exists
> >
> > --
> > Nice-to-have extra features (some necessary for us):
> > + define protocol (tricky), e.g. ftp/http/https/other
> > + after unpacking, run against mtree (possibly kept on separate server
> or locally) to validate sources
> >  + exit non-zero if particular conditions exist
> > + checksum tarball (possibly against checksums kept on separate server
> or locally) to validate sources
> >  + exit non-zero if particular conditions exist
> > + flags to override/change tar options
> >
> > ++ also nice to have, more cvsup features, (I need to read through man
> page again for a sanity check)
> >
> >
> > --
> > Regarding SVN:
> >
> > I know the SVN change is a profound leap foreword in source management
> and collaboration, (I've carried many shops through CVS/SVN/GIT migrations
> as an SA).
> >
> > Developing/hacking in the FreeBSD source is already simpler, though as
> an outsider, (no commit bit), the transition has been expectedly
> rough-edged :)
> >
> > On Jan 23, 2013, at 10:06 AM, Ronald Klop wrote:
> >> I've read about this initiative.
> >> http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/user/des/svnsup/
> >> Maybe you can help there.
> >
> > Aside from the heft/licence issues I noted above, it's a bit late to
> consider this, cvsup is going away:
> >
> > - the *ports* CVS/csup infrastructure is going to be disabled on
> Feburary 28th
> >
> > - the *source* CVS/csup infrastructure is deprecated, but doesn't have a
> definite end-date
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 04:12:22PM +0100, Frank Staals wrote:
> >>> I'm kind of surprised for the need of this though. Why not simply use
> >>> portsnap if you are not actively developing ports?
> >>
> > On Jan 23, 2013, at 10:37 AM, Oliver Brandmueller wrote:
> >> But my main concern is the system sources anyway. freebsd-update is not
> >> feasible for me, as described in the original post.
> >
> >
> > For users/administrators, to merely fetch OS sources for a given branch,
> it goes against the grain of nearly every reason users use FreeBSD to say
> 'just use svn'.
> >
> > Additionally, it's not been fun recently to 'just use portssnap', when
> the actual binary ports servers have gone through the recent security
> incident, (as well as all the changes).
> >
> > I'm not meaning to be negative here, but this has slid pretty far away
> from the ideals that *BSD users care about.
> >
> > Best,
> > .ike
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > # uncompressed canonical sources for svn (I believe I missed some
> dependencies of the dependencies)
> > du -d 1 -h
> > 5.5M  ./apr-1.4.6
> > 5.3M  ./sqlite-amalgamation-3071300
> > 13M   ./libtool-2.4.2
> > 79M   ./perl-5.16.2
> > 4.0M  ./neon-0.29.6
> > 66M   ./Python-2.7.1
> > 153M  ./db-5.3.21
> > 55M   ./subversion-1.7.8
> > 8.6M  ./m4-1.4.16
> > 3.0M  ./expat-2.1.0
> > 12M   ./pkg-config-0.27.1
> > 3.0M  ./gdbm-1.10
> > 67M   ./gettext-0.18.1.1
> > 21M   ./libiconv-1.14
> > 496M  .
> >
> > ## FreeBSD 9.1 Source
> > $ pwd ; du -d 1 -h
> > /usr/src
> > 3.2M  ./bin
> > 11M   ./cddl
> > 316M  ./contrib
> > 40M   ./crypto
> > 2.0M  ./etc
> > 3.7M  ./games
> > 5.9M  ./gnu
> > 1.1M  ./include
> > 484k  ./kerberos5
> > 31M   ./lib
> > 2.1M  ./libexec
> > 1.3M  ./release
> > 32k   ./rescue
> > 7.2M  ./sbin
> > 3.6M  ./secure
> > 39M   ./share
> > 200M  ./sys
> > 44M   ./tools
> > 13M   ./usr.bin
> > 18M   ./usr.sbin
> > 746M  .
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at lists.nycbug.org
> http://lists.nycbug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.nycbug.org:8443/pipermail/talk/attachments/20130123/2012be96/attachment.htm>