Breadcrumbs

SourceForge.net Adds Support for Git

Late last week SourceForge.net (external link) announced support for Git (external link) - a distributed revision control system - to complement their existing offerings of SVN and CVS. Git is a free distributed revision control system aimed at speed and efficiency for large code projects. It has some distinct advantages over CVS and SVN, primarily its distributed model over CVS and SVN's server-client model. It was initially designed for the Linux kernel, but is now used by a number of other high-profile projects, including Perl, Wine, VLC, Ruby on Rails, and others. Git adds to SourceForge's growing open-source toolkit.

If anyone is interested in trying out Git, then I recommend looking into GitHub (external link), a web-based revision-control hosting service powered by Git. GitHub have a lot of interesting features, especially for the developers maintaining projects. Overall, it is a lot like SourceForge, but based off of the Git revision system. However, now that SourceForge have added support for Git, it is much less compelling to use GitHub. Nonetheless, GitHub offer a refreshing interface a more social approach to open-source software.

Of course, you can also download and run Git yourself. Git's website (external link) has all the information you will need on how to set it up, plus some other Git-related tools.

Kudos to the SourceForge team for continuing to develop their amazing toolset and for their contributions to the open-source community.

Comments

  • You know I went and checked out github and have to say it looks like a great site, however there was one thing that I was unsure about.

    It says that when creating a public project that anyone can access it. I couldn't find if they can also publish code to it or just access the code.

    I'd hate to start a project and have some goof come along and totally change the architecture.

    Posted by -=Hero Doug=- on Tue 3 Mar 2009 at 4:24

  • I have not looked closely into GitHub because I use Bazaar instead of git, but I would expect that unless you allow the user to do so, the user would not be able to change the code in your project. What any user can do, however, is to change and *commit* to his/her copy of your project, and perhaps later somehow request for those changes to be integrated to your project, e.g., by a merge. This is a characteristic of distributed version control.

    Posted by Eugene Wee on Tue 3 Mar 2009 at 6:40

  • Eugene is correct, on GitHub, users can commit to their own copy of the project, but it doesn't necessarily commit to your personal copy. You can merge them lately. From what I understand, this helps to avoid a lot of accidental code loss that happens with CVS and SVN. I've never worked a huge project with multiple developers where this could potentially happen, so I don't know from first-hand experience, just reading.

    I've heard some good stuff about Bazaar too, but I locally just use SVN for everything I do. It comes built into OSX, so there was very little configuration to do before I actually started using it.

    Posted by Ethan Poole (external link) on Tue 3 Mar 2009 at 9:17

  • That was the assumption I made as well, but from the way I read their FAQ (I think it was there) it almost sounded like anyone had complete control over the project. I suppose in a way they do, but it's their own copy.

    Posted by -=Hero Doug=- on Tue 3 Mar 2009 at 9:27