I would like to introduce you lovely OpenSource Lovers to a GIT-Alternative called FOSSIL that I also stumbled upon because of this Blog.<br> It’s basically opensource Github-in-a-box which means it’s an SCM with:
- Bug-tracker
- Ticketting-system
- Forum
- Wiki-system
- even a Chat-functionality
- Has built-in GUI
- Also has a Web-Server
- Self-Hostable like Gitea/Forgejo
& the best part it’s all in ONE STANDALONE FILE!!! which is extremely lightweight which you can copy to your $PATH & works even in crappy internet. how cool is that!!
However this tool supports a completely different style of development in FOSS called the “Cathedral-Style” whereas GIT suports a “Bazaar-Style”<br> The person behind Fossil is the creator of SQLite, <u>Dr.Richard Hipp</u> & they even made other projects to support Fossil like a PIC-Like language called PikChr<br> Well just in case; here’s a list of difference between Git vs Fossil<br> & guess what!! they even have a hosting service called CHISEL
Listen; Just check it out & use it for fun in your spare time even with the flaws it has (& Try out Darcs & Pijul as well)
What about git needs replacement?
Git is far from user friendly but that’s a design consideration from a decentralized architecture. Fossil will have the same considerations. People need to learn how to use Git.
The problem is there’s only one person who really knows how to use it: Linus.
I’m so fuckin tired of hearing x is user unfriendly, it’s not intuitive enough.
Like fuckin yeah. Sometimes you have to actually learn something new to use something new when I first started driving it wasn’t user friendly. I had to learn how to do it
git is exactly as unfriendly as a distributed source control system that doesn’t shy away from power user commands needs to be
… sure it’s difficult to comprehend, but yknow what’s worse? getting into a bullshit situation and having broken garbage repos in every other “user friendly” system on the planet
I remember Linus saying in an interview that he’d only really been involved in git for the first 6 months or so and that the other devs had managed it without him since then. This makes sense - Linus’s creations aren’t successful because he’s the only person who understands them, they’re successful because there are so many other collaborators on them.
Isn’t that by design? I believe the intention was to offload that capability to an existing solution, usually ssh.
Yeah & for that we have to deal withe Dependency hell Look at the size of Fossil & compare
I must be missing whan you mean by remote/server since pull, fetch, push… All interact with remote copies of the repo.
As in it’s literally Github-in-a-box you can spin up a web-server with a command<br> (Imagine a git serve command that launches your GitHub instance)
Darcs does not require a central server, and works perfectly in offline mode.
Git can be used that way too. Am I missing something?
So GIT has a ticketting system, a Wiki, Bug-tracker built-into it along with a Version-tracker
It also has a Sync All command (I’m sure Git also has it Somewhere) ??
Darcs came out in 2003—Git in 2005. It was novel at the time compared to the alternatives. Darcs started as alternative to CSV & Subversion, not Git. Unlike Git it works on patches, not snapshots which has advantanges in merge conflicts.
Git uses mergetools, which do whatever you make them to. Patches can be created from snapshots, but snapshots are not guaranteed to be creatable from patches - you might not have original state.
EDIT: it uses merge drivers.
Since jujutsu is Git-compatible it has very much replaced Git for me and is what I’m using for everything now. Its workflow is so good and miles ahead of Git.
I was trying out Pijul for a while before that and while it has a lot of great ideas and has a lot of potential due to the way its foundations work its interface is way too janky right now and missing features and nothing I’ve reported or the many changes I’ve submitted have been fixed/pulled since March. I’d really like it to be good but alas…
I ‘forgot’ it on purpose.
The compatibility with Git means it is ultimately shackled to the design decisions fundamental to Git which require hacky workarounds. The maker of Pijul has pointed out some of the fundamental ways it can never handle patches is the manner of Darcs/Pijul, but I am not in the position to pull some of these quotes.
I would rather see revolution over evolution, & the weird ties to Google & hosting the project Microsoft GitHub rub me wrong.
Oh Yeah I like Pijul as well & I fully agree with your point of breaking the Git Hedgemony
BTW, tell me more about Darcs I want to know EDIT: Boy GIT-Fanboys are clearly mad about other VCSs existing😅
Darcs is sort of like Pijul before Pijul. It is a little slower, but might not even affect you at your project size, but what it has instead is a longer history with more tooling & support—on the CLI, support from package managers, forge options. It ends up being my preferred option just for this reason even if Pijul has better performance, handles binary files, & the identity server is novel.
Fossil is more like a Jira replacement, and its built by one person with a severe case of NIH. Not necessarily a bad thing but I lived through it with Ubuntu, not really a fan of this philosophy.
I think “Not Invented Here”. Meaning he wants to build everything himself from scratch despite there being alternatives he can use instead.
E.g.: Building your own httprequest library rather than using the existing one which is good enough.
With that attitude maybe we shouldn’t invent at all Why not go all the way
- open-source
- Ticketing
- Cathedral-style coding isn’t very Open-Source, if you believe the man who wrote the book and coined the term.
- it’s okay to post your own words instead of drunkenly jamming HTML into Markdown.
Cathedral-style coding isn’t very Open-Source
Cathedral vs bazaar is about development process, nothing to do with source code availability.
This - cathedral style development absolutely is a valid way to create free software and I don’t believe Eric S. Raymond (the guy who, I believe, coined the term) claimed otherwise, only that the bazaar model was “better.” Maintaining a bazaar style project is work, and it’s work that easily leads to burnout. We should normalize the idea that you don’t need to commit to being an “open source maintainer” to release a free software project; it should be enough to just release the source code (with or without binaries).
This thread might be the fastest I’ve ever seen discussion devolve from “that could be interesting” to just incomprehensible screaming.
