Comment on Apache Allura: an open source implementation of a software forge

• TCB13@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Also, Apache Allura supports revision control services other than Git, which apparently Gitea does not.

  Well, do you think its relevant to support anything else other than Git nowadays? Allura might do a bit more on that but Gitea has way more features and the UI is actually decent.

  source

  • lysdexic@programming.dev ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Well, do you think its relevant to support anything else other than Git nowadays?

    Yes. There are people who prefer Mercurial than Git, and there are quite a lot of projects out there which still use Subversion.

    I really don’t understand the mindset that leads to a belief that a monoculture is good or desirable.

    Allura might do a bit more on that (…)

    Yes, it does.

    (…) but Gitea has way more features and the UI is actually decent.

    That’s debatable, but to each its own.

    source

    • TCB13@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Oh well, we value different things it seems.

      source
  • IAm_A_Complete_Idiot@sh.itjust.works ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Not OP, but personally yes. Every code forge supporting only git just further enforces git’s monopoly on the VCS space. Git isn’t perfect, nor should be treated as perfect.

    The above is probably the reason why so many alternative VCS’s have to cludge themselves onto git’s file format despite likely being better served with their own.

    Interesting new VCS’s, most supporting their own native format as well for various reasons:

    • pijul
    • sapling
    • jujutsu

    Sapling is developed by meta, jujutsu by an engineer at Google. Pijul is completely FOSS and was developed by an academic iirc. If you’re okay with not new:

    • mercurial
    • fossil
    • darcs

    VCS’s are still being itterated on and tooling being super git centric hurts that.

    source

    • TCB13@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Every code forge supporting only git just further enforces git’s monopoly on the VCS space

      So what? You speak about git as if it were some half-proprietary solution aimed at maximizing corporate profit. Git isn’t Chrome.

      Git isn’t perfect, nor should be treated as perfect.

      Yes, and because of that fact it has been evolving over the years.

      VCS’s are still being itterated on and tooling being super git centric hurts that.

      What I see is some resentful people about git - in the same way that happened with SVN and oh well git is objectively better than that.

      source

      • IAm_A_Complete_Idiot@sh.itjust.works ⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        It being objectively better then SVN doesn’t mean that it’s the best we can do. Git has all sorts of non-ideal behaviors that other VCS’s don’t. Pijul’s data structure for instance is inherently different from git and it can’t be retrofitted on top. Making tooling only support got effectively kills off any potential competitors that could be superior to git.

        One example is pijul specifically let’s you get away from the idea that moving commits between branches changes their identity, because pijul builds a tree of diffs. If two subtrees of diffs are distinct, they can always be applied without changing identity of those diffs. This means “cherry picking” a commit and then merging a commit doesn’t effectively merge that commit twice resulting in a merge conflict.

        That’s one example how one VCS can be better.

        source

        • -> View More Comments