One of the most common Google searches I see in my Feedjit log is from people looking for help in the whole Subversive versus Subclipse debate. It has always dumbfounded me why we have two efforts building Eclipse team providers for Subversion. But I've long given up on fighting that battle.
So as I start to dive into the code for qemu, I found myself in need of making that choice again. Some would say go with Subversive since it's an Eclipse project. I would, but they are mired in provisioning hell with a key component for making it work being on another site due to licensing/IP reasons. That didn't turn me on much so I'm going with Subclipse.
And so far so good, but I've only just checked out the repository. We'll see how it goes if I need to make any patches, and as I keep updating. But my hope is that as it has aged, all the issues I saw a couple of years ago have been addressed.
My heart is still with distributed version control and git in particular. And there is discussions on the qemu list about moving to git. And in particular, I'm very interested in how these team providers work with the CDT and how they work with the changes were doing for e4 on the IResource front. And it's pretty clear that these plug-ins, no matter what version control system they target, need to work well to keep our users and customers engaged.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
I used both of them for a while. And I can say, subclipse is MUCH more convenient and feature rich.
Yes. I'm sure most those google searches were from me; why do all Eclipse searches lead back to cdtdoug ;)?
I had to make a coin-toss decision on which one to integrate with our product. Subclipse won. It seems bizarre that the more featureful wasn't the chosen one.
Ho hum.
Subversive isn't actually the chosen one. The Google searches were pointing back to the blog entry I noted when Subclipse pulled out of the race. I think they saw the IP issues coming that Subversive ran into and didn't want any part of it.
At the end of the day, you got to ask whether they made the right choice. Maybe the did...
don't expect the same level of support for git that you have for svn. the eclipse git plugin is really very raw at the moment.
Very true. egit is very new and very under staffed. But there is so much talk about it in the Eclipse community, that situation will not stay this way.
If you really want to use git, have you considered "just using it"? I do not get all the push to have the Eclipse Foundation add support for git. You can already use it. git-svn is supported to work great, and is part of git. There is also a git-cvs.
These tools let you use git as git and you just use these other components when you need to push/pull with the master repository which is CVS or SVN.
For example, someone already has CDT setup in git, so you do not even need to do anything:
http://github.com/jamesblackburn/cdt-core/tree/CVS_HEAD
There is some QEMU stuff already in github too. If the repository you want is not already there, you can just extract it yourself using git-svn.
Anyway, I am glad you are using Subclipse. Please report problems/suggestions to our project.
I switched from subclipse to subversive some time ago and I really like it (the only problem is the installation). I would love to run both in parallel, but unfortunately both plugins have some views/dialogs/perspectives with the same name and this makes it very hard to run them in parallel...
Technically it is no problem.
Michael
As of early Sept 2009, Subversive has a connector discovery feature, so there's now no need to add Polarion update sites. See http://www.polarion.com/products/svn/subversive/connector_discovery.php
Post a Comment