Quantcast

yarp: migration to git

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
14 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

yarp: migration to git

Lorenzo Natale-2
Dear all,
there was some discussion lately among Daniele, Paul and myself to migrate the YARP repository to use git. For those who are not familiar git is being adopted in several projects and is getting more and more popular since it has powerful features (it is faster, distributed, has better support for branches and merges, etc.). This looks like a good time to do the migration since sourceforge is pushing an upgrade to all repositories that will force fixes to the documentation and some annoyances to users and developers.

Option 1) is to migrate to github, since it offers concurrent support for git and subversion. In this case users that do not want to use git will be able to checkout and even commit using an svn client (of course losing the powerful features of git in this case ;) ). The (minor) downside of this solution is that committers will have to get a new account on github (assuming they don't have one already).

Option 2) is to stay in sourceforge and migrate to git. In this case there will be no need for new accounts but everyone will be forced to get a git client to checkout the software.

Considering that many YARP users use svn to download and update the software, I prefer option 1 since it has a minor impact, but I'm open to consider option 2 if there are preferences.

Of course other suggestions are welcome too!

Best,
Lorenzo

P.S. notice that this involves only YARP, we have no plans to move the iCub repository since it is too large for git

--
Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia
Lorenzo Natale, PhD
[hidden email]
via Morego, 30 16163 Genova
Ph: +39 010 71781400
Fax: +39 010 7170205
www.iit.it


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The Forrester  
Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in the  
endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner to
tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Robotcub-hackers mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/robotcub-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [YARP-devel] yarp: migration to git

Giovanni Saponaro-2
On 6 March 2013 08:43, Lorenzo Natale <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi all,

> Option 1) is to migrate to github, since it offers concurrent support for git and subversion. In this case users that do not want to use git will be able to checkout and even commit using an svn client (of course losing the powerful features of git in this case ;) ). The (minor) downside of this solution is that committers will have to get a new account on github (assuming they don't have one already).
>
> Option 2) is to stay in sourceforge and migrate to git. In this case there will be no need for new accounts but everyone will be forced to get a git client to checkout the software.
>
> Considering that many YARP users use svn to download and update the software, I prefer option 1 since it has a minor impact, but I'm open to consider option 2 if there are preferences.

Personally I don't have a clear preference over either of the two
proposed options. Let me know if I can help with testing, if needed.

A comment on the following:

> P.S. notice that this involves only YARP, we have no plans to move the iCub repository since it is too large for git

I don't understand why iCub would be "too large for git" - but perhaps
the space available for a free github account is limited.

However, precisely because the iCub repository is large (presently it
takes a long time to checkout iCub with SVN), and because Git has
better speed/space management than SVN: wouldn't these be strong
reasons to adopt Git for iCub, too? (If not now, in the future.)

If possible, I would be in favour of a solution that keeps YARP and
iCub using the same version control system. Reasons:

- less complex, easier to remember to just use one system
- with the two-system scenario, if one has to do commits to both
repositories in the same day (perhaps it's not such a frequent
scenario), he wouldn't have to remember the subtle differences between
svn commit and git commit (which has to be followed by git push due to
the distributed nature of Git)
- I don't think that switching from SVN to Git is a big deal for
developers: it is a one-time transition and after some usage people
will get acquainted to the new software/syntax. There was already a
similar transition in the past if I recall correctly (from CVS to SVN)
and it was no big deal

Thanks,
Giovanni

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The Forrester  
Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in the  
endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner to
tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Robotcub-hackers mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/robotcub-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [YARP-devel] yarp: migration to git

Daniele E. Domenichelli
Hello Giovanni,

On Thursday 07 March 2013 15:33:43 Giovanni Saponaro wrote:
> A comment on the following:
> > P.S. notice that this involves only YARP, we have no plans to move
> > the iCub repository since it is too large for git
> I don't understand why iCub would be "too large for git" - but perhaps
> the space available for a free github account is limited.

Git doesn't have a good support for large binary files, therefore "too
large for git" was a simplification of "has several binary files,
firmware, etc." Also the iCub repository is made of several modules
(main, firmware, contrib, ecc.)
I think that in the _very long term_ we should move to git also iCub, or
at least part of it, but we must plan it very carefully and probably
split it into several modules. If we do it later, they will still be in
the history (unlike svn, git downloads the whole history of the
repository) so we should do this together with the migration.

On the other hand the should be easier for several reasons, first of all
that committers are very few compared to iCub repository. In this way we
will test the transition etc.

Therefore, YARP transition to git will happen before and of course there
will be a (possibly long) transition period, but this is imho required.


> If possible, I would be in favour of a solution that keeps YARP and
> iCub using the same version control system.

The github proposal is aiming exactly at this. User will still be able
to use SVN only, but at the same time they can learn how to use git, and
use it, if they prefer so (I really do actually :) )


Cheers,
 Daniele

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The Forrester  
Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in the  
endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner to
tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Robotcub-hackers mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/robotcub-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [YARP-devel] yarp: migration to git

serena ivaldi-2
Hello everyone,

to me it is ok moving to GIT, I have an account and I can help with
testing.

Regarding big files, the ideal to me is to differentiate code, which is
usually light, from firmware and other "big" files. I don't know if this
feeling is shared, but as iCub users/coders we usually update more
frequently the software than the firmware etc. So I'd rather have a
global YARP+iCub update, code-only.
Maybe even have the possibility to compile all in once :)

Since we're talking about reorganization/transition I'd like to point
out a special need I have, that is to have a monitoring tool or an
informative tool about the available modules and their status in /main
and /contrib especially. It is difficult for me to follow all the
modules which are being developed and that I could re-use from /contrib
(sometimes even from the /main). The doxygen documentation is ok, but it
is not enough in my view.

Sometimes when I code modules for our needs or I need something new, I
think "maybe someone else already did it" (which is the good thing of
shared and open-source software!) then I look into /contrib and I feel a
little bit lost. Maybe a web page where everyone can advertise their
"stable" modules (ie modules which are working that way and
hypothetically will never change their behavior and code - except for
bug-correction) could help in that.

If there's already a tool like this and I don't know it.. please update
:)

Serena





On Thu, 7 Mar 2013 17:29:44 +0100, Daniele E. Domenichelli wrote:

> Hello Giovanni,
>
> On Thursday 07 March 2013 15:33:43 Giovanni Saponaro wrote:
>> A comment on the following:
>> > P.S. notice that this involves only YARP, we have no plans to move
>> > the iCub repository since it is too large for git
>> I don't understand why iCub would be "too large for git" - but
>> perhaps
>> the space available for a free github account is limited.
>
> Git doesn't have a good support for large binary files, therefore
> "too
> large for git" was a simplification of "has several binary files,
> firmware, etc." Also the iCub repository is made of several modules
> (main, firmware, contrib, ecc.)
> I think that in the _very long term_ we should move to git also iCub,
> or
> at least part of it, but we must plan it very carefully and probably
> split it into several modules. If we do it later, they will still be
> in
> the history (unlike svn, git downloads the whole history of the
> repository) so we should do this together with the migration.
>
> On the other hand the should be easier for several reasons, first of
> all
> that committers are very few compared to iCub repository. In this way
> we
> will test the transition etc.
>
> Therefore, YARP transition to git will happen before and of course
> there
> will be a (possibly long) transition period, but this is imho
> required.
>
>
>> If possible, I would be in favour of a solution that keeps YARP and
>> iCub using the same version control system.
>
> The github proposal is aiming exactly at this. User will still be
> able
> to use SVN only, but at the same time they can learn how to use git,
> and
> use it, if they prefer so (I really do actually :) )
>
>
> Cheers,
>  Daniele
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The
> Forrester
> Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in
> the
> endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner
> to
> tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Robotcub-hackers mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/robotcub-hackers


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The Forrester  
Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in the  
endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner to
tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Robotcub-hackers mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/robotcub-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [YARP-devel] yarp: migration to git

Stéphane Lallée

Regarding big files, the ideal to me is to differentiate code, which is
usually light, from firmware and other "big" files. I don't know if this
feeling is shared, but as iCub users/coders we usually update more
frequently the software than the firmware etc. So I'd rather have a
global YARP+iCub update, code-only.
Maybe even have the possibility to compile all in once :)

I agree with Serena on this point. Most of the time the binaries file are not "desired" when we do an update. It takes long time to download and finally what we cared about initially were the source code (I know, we can just update the subdirectory of interest...).
It would be nice if it was possible to keep binary files and source separated somehow...
 

Since we're talking about reorganization/transition I'd like to point
out a special need I have, that is to have a monitoring tool or an
informative tool about the available modules and their status in /main
and /contrib especially. It is difficult for me to follow all the
modules which are being developed and that I could re-use from /contrib
(sometimes even from the /main). The doxygen documentation is ok, but it
is not enough in my view.

Sometimes when I code modules for our needs or I need something new, I
think "maybe someone else already did it" (which is the good thing of
shared and open-source software!) then I look into /contrib and I feel a
little bit lost. Maybe a web page where everyone can advertise their
"stable" modules (ie modules which are working that way and
hypothetically will never change their behavior and code - except for
bug-correction) could help in that.

If there's already a tool like this and I don't know it.. please update
:)

Serena





On Thu, 7 Mar 2013 17:29:44 +0100, Daniele E. Domenichelli wrote:
> Hello Giovanni,
>
> On Thursday 07 March 2013 15:33:43 Giovanni Saponaro wrote:
>> A comment on the following:
>> > P.S. notice that this involves only YARP, we have no plans to move
>> > the iCub repository since it is too large for git
>> I don't understand why iCub would be "too large for git" - but
>> perhaps
>> the space available for a free github account is limited.
>
> Git doesn't have a good support for large binary files, therefore
> "too
> large for git" was a simplification of "has several binary files,
> firmware, etc." Also the iCub repository is made of several modules
> (main, firmware, contrib, ecc.)
> I think that in the _very long term_ we should move to git also iCub,
> or
> at least part of it, but we must plan it very carefully and probably
> split it into several modules. If we do it later, they will still be
> in
> the history (unlike svn, git downloads the whole history of the
> repository) so we should do this together with the migration.
>
> On the other hand the should be easier for several reasons, first of
> all
> that committers are very few compared to iCub repository. In this way
> we
> will test the transition etc.
>
> Therefore, YARP transition to git will happen before and of course
> there
> will be a (possibly long) transition period, but this is imho
> required.
>
>
>> If possible, I would be in favour of a solution that keeps YARP and
>> iCub using the same version control system.
>
> The github proposal is aiming exactly at this. User will still be
> able
> to use SVN only, but at the same time they can learn how to use git,
> and
> use it, if they prefer so (I really do actually :) )
>
>
> Cheers,
>  Daniele
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The
> Forrester
> Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in
> the
> endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner
> to
> tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Robotcub-hackers mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/robotcub-hackers


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The Forrester
Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in the
endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner to
tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Yarp0-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/yarp0-devel


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The Forrester  
Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in the  
endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner to
tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Robotcub-hackers mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/robotcub-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [YARP-devel] yarp: migration to git

Giovanni Saponaro-2
In reply to this post by Daniele E. Domenichelli
On 7 March 2013 16:29, Daniele E. Domenichelli
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> On Thursday 07 March 2013 15:33:43 Giovanni Saponaro wrote:
> > I don't understand why iCub would be "too large for git" - but perhaps
> > the space available for a free github account is limited.
>
> Git doesn't have a good support for large binary files, therefore "too
> large for git" was a simplification of "has several binary files,
> firmware, etc." Also the iCub repository is made of several modules [...]

Hi Daniele,
Thanks for the clarification.

Like other thread participants have said, I also would appreciate a
way to checkout all code without binaries/firmware.

Cheers,
Giovanni

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The Forrester  
Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in the  
endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner to
tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Robotcub-hackers mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/robotcub-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [YARP-devel] yarp: migration to git

Bruno Nery-2
How about splitting the code into different repositories (and maybe have a big project with submodules for people who want to check everything out)?

--
Bruno Nery


On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Giovanni Saponaro <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 7 March 2013 16:29, Daniele E. Domenichelli
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> On Thursday 07 March 2013 15:33:43 Giovanni Saponaro wrote:
> > I don't understand why iCub would be "too large for git" - but perhaps
> > the space available for a free github account is limited.
>
> Git doesn't have a good support for large binary files, therefore "too
> large for git" was a simplification of "has several binary files,
> firmware, etc." Also the iCub repository is made of several modules [...]

Hi Daniele,
Thanks for the clarification.

Like other thread participants have said, I also would appreciate a
way to checkout all code without binaries/firmware.

Cheers,
Giovanni

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The Forrester
Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in the
endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner to
tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Robotcub-hackers mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/robotcub-hackers


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The Forrester  
Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in the  
endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner to
tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Robotcub-hackers mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/robotcub-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [YARP-devel] yarp: migration to git

Lorenzo Natale-2
In reply to this post by Giovanni Saponaro-2
Ciao Giovanni,

> Like other thread participants have said, I also would appreciate a way to
> checkout all code without binaries/firmware.

As already pointed out by Daniele the plan is to reorganize the iCub repository, with better separations between projects, code, binary files (if any). In the meanwhile consider that you don't have to download and update the "whole" repository but just subsets of it, e.g.:

iCub/main
iCub/contrib
iCub/firmware

etc...

best,
Lorenzo


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The Forrester  
Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in the  
endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner to
tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Robotcub-hackers mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/robotcub-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: yarp: migration to git

Lorenzo Natale-2
In reply to this post by Lorenzo Natale-2
Hi all,
To follow up on this, looking at people's comments looks like option 1) is preferable (migrate to github). We will let you know when the migration will take place and provide appropriate instructions.

Best,
Lorenzo

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lorenzo Natale [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: mercoledì 6 marzo 2013 09:44
> To: [hidden email]; 'Robotcub-
> [hidden email]'
> Subject: [YARP-devel] yarp: migration to git
>
> Dear all,
> there was some discussion lately among Daniele, Paul and myself to migrate
> the YARP repository to use git. For those who are not familiar git is being
> adopted in several projects and is getting more and more popular since it has
> powerful features (it is faster, distributed, has better support for branches
> and merges, etc.). This looks like a good time to do the migration since
> sourceforge is pushing an upgrade to all repositories that will force fixes to
> the documentation and some annoyances to users and developers.
>
> Option 1) is to migrate to github, since it offers concurrent support for git and
> subversion. In this case users that do not want to use git will be able to
> checkout and even commit using an svn client (of course losing the powerful
> features of git in this case ;) ). The (minor) downside of this solution is that
> committers will have to get a new account on github (assuming they don't
> have one already).
>
> Option 2) is to stay in sourceforge and migrate to git. In this case there will be
> no need for new accounts but everyone will be forced to get a git client to
> checkout the software.
>
> Considering that many YARP users use svn to download and update the
> software, I prefer option 1 since it has a minor impact, but I'm open to
> consider option 2 if there are preferences.
>
> Of course other suggestions are welcome too!
>
> Best,
> Lorenzo
>
> P.S. notice that this involves only YARP, we have no plans to move the iCub
> repository since it is too large for git
>
> --
> Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia
> Lorenzo Natale, PhD
> [hidden email]
> via Morego, 30 16163 Genova
> Ph: +39 010 71781400
> Fax: +39 010 7170205
> www.iit.it
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The Forrester
> Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in the
> endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner to tackle
> endpoint security challenges, access the full report.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Yarp0-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/yarp0-devel

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Minimize network downtime and maximize team effectiveness.
Reduce network management and security costs.Learn how to hire
the most talented Cisco Certified professionals. Visit the
Employer Resources Portal
http://www.cisco.com/web/learning/employer_resources/index.html
_______________________________________________
Robotcub-hackers mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/robotcub-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: yarp: migration to git

Lorenzo Natale-2
Dear All,
just to notify that the yarp migration to github will take place starting on the 18 of April together with the iCub repository upgrade.

Best,
Lorenzo

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lorenzo Natale [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: martedì 2 aprile 2013 19:34
> To: [hidden email]; 'Robotcub-
> [hidden email]'
> Subject: Re: [YARP-devel] yarp: migration to git
>
> Hi all,
> To follow up on this, looking at people's comments looks like option 1) is
> preferable (migrate to github). We will let you know when the migration will
> take place and provide appropriate instructions.
>
> Best,
> Lorenzo
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Lorenzo Natale [mailto:[hidden email]]
> > Sent: mercoledì 6 marzo 2013 09:44
> > To: [hidden email]; 'Robotcub-
> > [hidden email]'
> > Subject: [YARP-devel] yarp: migration to git
> >
> > Dear all,
> > there was some discussion lately among Daniele, Paul and myself to
> > migrate the YARP repository to use git. For those who are not familiar
> > git is being adopted in several projects and is getting more and more
> > popular since it has powerful features (it is faster, distributed, has
> > better support for branches and merges, etc.). This looks like a good
> > time to do the migration since sourceforge is pushing an upgrade to
> > all repositories that will force fixes to the documentation and some
> annoyances to users and developers.
> >
> > Option 1) is to migrate to github, since it offers concurrent support
> > for git and subversion. In this case users that do not want to use git
> > will be able to checkout and even commit using an svn client (of
> > course losing the powerful features of git in this case ;) ). The
> > (minor) downside of this solution is that committers will have to get
> > a new account on github (assuming they don't have one already).
> >
> > Option 2) is to stay in sourceforge and migrate to git. In this case
> > there will be no need for new accounts but everyone will be forced to
> > get a git client to checkout the software.
> >
> > Considering that many YARP users use svn to download and update the
> > software, I prefer option 1 since it has a minor impact, but I'm open
> > to consider option 2 if there are preferences.
> >
> > Of course other suggestions are welcome too!
> >
> > Best,
> > Lorenzo
> >
> > P.S. notice that this involves only YARP, we have no plans to move the
> > iCub repository since it is too large for git
> >
> > --
> > Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia
> > Lorenzo Natale, PhD
> > [hidden email]
> > via Morego, 30 16163 Genova
> > Ph: +39 010 71781400
> > Fax: +39 010 7170205
> > www.iit.it
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > -------- Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The
> > Forrester
> > Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in
> > the endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right
> > partner to tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report.
> > http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev
> > _______________________________________________
> > Yarp0-devel mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/yarp0-devel
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Minimize network downtime and maximize team effectiveness.
> Reduce network management and security costs.Learn how to hire the most
> talented Cisco Certified professionals. Visit the Employer Resources Portal
> http://www.cisco.com/web/learning/employer_resources/index.html
> _______________________________________________
> Yarp0-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/yarp0-devel

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Precog is a next-generation analytics platform capable of advanced
analytics on semi-structured data. The platform includes APIs for building
apps and a phenomenal toolset for data science. Developers can use
our toolset for easy data analysis & visualization. Get a free account!
http://www2.precog.com/precogplatform/slashdotnewsletter
_______________________________________________
Robotcub-hackers mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/robotcub-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [YARP-devel] yarp: migration to git

Giovanni Saponaro-2
In reply to this post by Daniele E. Domenichelli
On 7 March 2013 at 16:29, Daniele E. Domenichelli
<[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi all,

With regard to this old thread:

> On Thursday 07 March 2013 15:33:43 Giovanni Saponaro wrote:
> > I don't understand why iCub would be "too large for git" - but perhaps
> > the space available for a free github account is limited.
>
> Git doesn't have a good support for large binary files, therefore "too
> large for git" was a simplification of "has several binary files,
> firmware, etc." Also the iCub repository is made of several modules

Git Large File Storage
https://github.com/blog/1986-announcing-git-large-file-storage-lfs

A note on pricing:
Every user and organization on GitHub.com with Git LFS enabled will
begin with 1 GB of free file storage and a monthly bandwidth quota of
1 GB. If your workflow requires higher quotas, you can easily purchase
more storage and bandwidth for your account.

Ciao,
Giovanni

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BPM Camp - Free Virtual Workshop May 6th at 10am PDT/1PM EDT
Develop your own process in accordance with the BPMN 2 standard
Learn Process modeling best practices with Bonita BPM through live exercises
http://www.bonitasoft.com/be-part-of-it/events/bpm-camp-virtual- event?utm_
source=Sourceforge_BPM_Camp_5_6_15&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=VA_SF
_______________________________________________
Robotcub-hackers mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/robotcub-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [YARP-devel] yarp: migration to git

Lorenzo Natale-2
Thank you Giovanni,
Nice!

Some comments:

We mostly need a place for storing binary releases so that we can stop hosting them on sourceforce (which is confusing). Binaries are quite large and would soon fill the quota of 1Gb.

The other concern is that you need a special git client -- is this correct? -- this may be annoying.

Lorenzo

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Giovanni Saponaro [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: lunedì 13 aprile 2015 14:26
> To: Daniele Domenichelli
> Cc: [hidden email]; [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [YARP-devel] yarp: migration to git
>
> On 7 March 2013 at 16:29, Daniele E. Domenichelli
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> With regard to this old thread:
>
> > On Thursday 07 March 2013 15:33:43 Giovanni Saponaro wrote:
> > > I don't understand why iCub would be "too large for git" - but
> > > perhaps the space available for a free github account is limited.
> >
> > Git doesn't have a good support for large binary files, therefore "too
> > large for git" was a simplification of "has several binary files,
> > firmware, etc." Also the iCub repository is made of several modules
>
> Git Large File Storage
> https://github.com/blog/1986-announcing-git-large-file-storage-lfs
>
> A note on pricing:
> Every user and organization on GitHub.com with Git LFS enabled will begin with
> 1 GB of free file storage and a monthly bandwidth quota of
> 1 GB. If your workflow requires higher quotas, you can easily purchase more
> storage and bandwidth for your account.
>
> Ciao,
> Giovanni
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> BPM Camp - Free Virtual Workshop May 6th at 10am PDT/1PM EDT Develop
> your own process in accordance with the BPMN 2 standard Learn Process
> modeling best practices with Bonita BPM through live exercises
> http://www.bonitasoft.com/be-part-of-it/events/bpm-camp-virtual-
> event?utm_
> source=Sourceforge_BPM_Camp_5_6_15&utm_medium=email&utm_campaig
> n=VA_SF
> _______________________________________________
> Yarp0-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/yarp0-devel

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BPM Camp - Free Virtual Workshop May 6th at 10am PDT/1PM EDT
Develop your own process in accordance with the BPMN 2 standard
Learn Process modeling best practices with Bonita BPM through live exercises
http://www.bonitasoft.com/be-part-of-it/events/bpm-camp-virtual- event?utm_
source=Sourceforge_BPM_Camp_5_6_15&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=VA_SF
_______________________________________________
Robotcub-hackers mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/robotcub-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [YARP-devel] yarp: migration to git

Giovanni Saponaro-2
On 13 April 2015 at 17:46, Lorenzo Natale <[hidden email]> wrote:

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Giovanni Saponaro [mailto:[hidden email]]
>> Git Large File Storage
>> https://github.com/blog/1986-announcing-git-large-file-storage-lfs
>
> Thank you Giovanni,
> Nice!
>
> Some comments:
>
> We mostly need a place for storing binary releases so that we can stop hosting them on sourceforce (which is confusing). Binaries are quite large and would soon fill the quota of 1Gb.

Git LFS handles pointers/urls to big files, which can then be hosted
on any server. So if the server with the large files is not
github.com, this could work with little effort/cost. I haven't tested
this yet, I'm waiting for their early access email with further
instructions.

> The other concern is that you need a special git client -- is this correct? -- this may be annoying.

True, for now it needs a separate program (extension).

However, having an open protocol
(https://github.com/github/git-lfs/blob/master/docs/spec.md) and being
endorsed by GitHub, it might be supported by common clients in the
future.

Ciao,
-Giovanni

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BPM Camp - Free Virtual Workshop May 6th at 10am PDT/1PM EDT
Develop your own process in accordance with the BPMN 2 standard
Learn Process modeling best practices with Bonita BPM through live exercises
http://www.bonitasoft.com/be-part-of-it/events/bpm-camp-virtual- event?utm_
source=Sourceforge_BPM_Camp_5_6_15&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=VA_SF
_______________________________________________
Robotcub-hackers mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/robotcub-hackers
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: [YARP-devel] yarp: migration to git

Daniele E. Domenichelli
In reply to this post by Lorenzo Natale-2
Hello Giovanni,

Thanks for the information, it looks promising. The concept is very
similar to git annex, but with some differences that makes it interesting.


On 13/04/15 18:46, Lorenzo Natale wrote:
> We mostly need a place for storing binary releases so that
> we can stop hosting them on sourceforce (which is confusing).
> Binaries are quite large and would soon fill the quota of
> 1Gb.


If I understand correctly, the storage does not have to be on
github.com, but on any git server that implements the specification.
I wouldn't recommend to be early adopters for yarp/icub, but I'll
definitely keep an eye on that.


Cheers,
 Daniele

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BPM Camp - Free Virtual Workshop May 6th at 10am PDT/1PM EDT
Develop your own process in accordance with the BPMN 2 standard
Learn Process modeling best practices with Bonita BPM through live exercises
http://www.bonitasoft.com/be-part-of-it/events/bpm-camp-virtual- event?utm_
source=Sourceforge_BPM_Camp_5_6_15&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=VA_SF
_______________________________________________
Robotcub-hackers mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/robotcub-hackers
Loading...