Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > Java > Distributing Java Source

Reply
Thread Tools

Distributing Java Source

 
 
thufir
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-27-2008
On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 18:51:49 +0100, Tom Anderson wrote:

>> When you checkout code from subversion there's no compression. If
>> you're compressing, that sounds like an opportunity for file
>> corruption.

>
> Oh really. And you've had that happen to you, have you?


No, I just have aversion to binary files.

> A compressed file has better protection against external corruption than
> an uncompressed one - there are fewer bits to be hit by cosmic rays or
> other random processes, and all archive formats worth bothering with
> include checksums, which will detect many kinds of corruption. An
> increased chance of corruption could only come from a defective
> implementation of the compressor or decompressor, and the simple fact is
> that there aren't many such implementations in use in the wild.




-Thufir
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
thufir
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-27-2008
On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 18:40:31 +0000, Roedy Green wrote:


> The desire to serve via a VCS system is primarily to comply with a
> request from JetBrains intellij IDEA, my IDE. They want me to do that as
> a condition for getting a free copy of the IDE.


subversion works nicely for me.

> It it also might encourage interest in my code, making it more "serious"
> and getting free publicity from the hosting VCS.


http://code.google.com works nicely for me.

> Anyone trying to stay on top of my many micro changes could do it more
> efficiently than by downloading entire ZIPs each time. It also makes it
> clearer to them just what I changed.



Plus, there are logs every time you commit a change, giving you an
opportunity to explain the change, or the branch, and so forth.



-Thufir
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
thufir
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-27-2008
On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 18:31:51 +0000, Roedy Green wrote:

>>I like code.google.com, which is free, which uses subversion

>
> isn't that just for google widgets?



Not at all, "available and free for all open source projects."

You can do java code (I do), ruby on rails, whatever. python. They
partner with sourceforge but I'm not sure of the details regarding that.



"Project Hosting

Google Code runs a project hosting service[5] that provides revision
control using Subversion (the repositories are implemented on top of
Google's BigTable, but this is hidden to the user), an issue tracker, a
wiki for documentation, and a file download feature. The service is
available and free for all Open Source projects.

The site allows the projects to use only one of seven licenses (Apache,
Artistic, BSD, GPLv2, GPLv3, LGPL, and MIT). The limitation is part of
Google's stance against license proliferation."



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Code




-Thufir
 
Reply With Quote
 
thufir
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-27-2008
On Thu, 24 Jul 2008 21:22:50 -0400, Lew wrote:

> Daniel Dyer wrote:
>> Atomic commits are a big plus, IMO. I also prefer having one single
>> revision number for the entire repository rather than a separate one
>> for

>
> That's precisely what I despise in SVN.



Why? I've only ever used svn. Isn't it good to know precisely what is
in the version?


-Thufir
 
Reply With Quote
 
thufir
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-27-2008
On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 16:21:20 +0100, Daniel Dyer wrote:

> Repository corruption, poor performance, very little security, unusable
> remotely without 3rd party add-ons, inability to have two working copies
> of the same project at the same time, serious problems with timezones,
> and more (like converting directories to uppercase on import, thus
> breaking Java packages).


sounds like a keeper, particularly the "directories to uppercase"


-Thufir
 
Reply With Quote
 
thufir
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-27-2008
On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 20:30:35 -0400, Lew wrote:


> I'm certain that SVN can handle it, now.
>
> I hate putting IDE-specific artifacts in the trunk of a repository.
> Only project-neutral artifacts belong there - the actual deployed
> source. I use NetBeans, which has its own (frighteningly complete)
> build.xml and a project directory 'nbproject/' in every project. Those
> things don't belong in the official build, and they don't reliably
> convey to a different developer or workstation.



From NB, I select an "existing source" app and point it the foo/src
folder which is, I think, the trunk -- it's whatever svn downloaded.
Then new packages and source code are added to the trunk on commits and
so forth.


-Thufir
 
Reply With Quote
 
Mike Schilling
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-27-2008
Lew wrote:
> thufir wrote:
>> Why? I've only ever used svn. Isn't it good to know precisely
>> what
>> is in the version?

>
> Based on responses in this group I am losing my fear of Subversion.


c.l.j.p, the anti-McCarthy.


 
Reply With Quote
 
thufir
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-27-2008
On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 21:07:32 -0400, Lew wrote:

>> Why? I've only ever used svn. Isn't it good to know precisely what is
>> in the version?

>
> Based on responses in this group I am losing my fear of Subversion.



Ah, good. Do post your results!


-Thufir
 
Reply With Quote
 
Roedy Green
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-27-2008
On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 00:30:39 GMT, thufir <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :

>The site allows the projects to use only one of seven licenses (Apache,
>Artistic, BSD, GPLv2, GPLv3, LGPL, and MIT). The limitation is part of
>Google's stance against license proliferation."


This is my problem. I have a non-standard licence, public domain
effectively with one restriction, non-military use only.
--

Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products
The Java Glossary
http://mindprod.com
 
Reply With Quote
 
Arne Vajh°j
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      07-27-2008
Roedy Green wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 00:30:39 GMT, thufir <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :
>> The site allows the projects to use only one of seven licenses (Apache,
>> Artistic, BSD, GPLv2, GPLv3, LGPL, and MIT). The limitation is part of
>> Google's stance against license proliferation."

>
> This is my problem. I have a non-standard licence, public domain
> effectively with one restriction, non-military use only.


But that restriction also make it non open source, so even if
they allowed all open source it would be a problem.

Arne
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
distributing apps without the Python source? Joe Strout Python 6 10-09-2008 12:27 AM
Securely distributing python source code as an application? xkenneth Python 6 12-11-2007 10:24 AM
Distributing java.policy with Applet.jar Willy Stevens Java 9 10-06-2007 10:30 AM
Question for distributing a program using Java Mail Justin Java 2 07-09-2007 11:39 PM
Distributing closed source modules Jiri Barton Python 5 03-29-2005 06:07 PM



Advertisments