I was very enthusiastic at first, but after a few days that went away. The render_partial stuff can lead to very hard to track bugs, where you're not sure what object you're in. I've had one bug where I literally put a debug statement on every line of a partial template function in order to find out what went wrong. It turned out that I'd forgotten two (), and was now instantiating a variable instead off accessing the setter function. Which leads me to a problem I have with Ruby: the fact that function calls do not need (). Syntactically this is confusing. Ok, I was a Ruby newbie, but I'm a very experienced programmer, using currently C, C++, Tcl, Python, Java, PHP, Awk, and some others. This automagic stuff of Rails might seem nice, but i'd hate to use it on a larger project; the lack of visibility of which functions exist will lead to major problems.
When I started using SVN there was only Berkeley DB. It was extolled as the best thing ever.... I don't wanna try anything on my version control system. Are yous suggesting that using the BDB is not using SVN correctly? If so, they should remove the option from the tool, and make very clear to all users that they should upgrade.
I don't feel like trying if fsfs will be reliable, I am not in the business of usertesting version control systems.
Anyway, thanks for your tips, which I am well aware of since I moved from one version of BDB to another (remember my first post).
Also, I have the printed manual of subversion on my desk, and did read most of it, especially when we ran into trouble. blog nicely points out some of the problems I have, including the non-existent branch/merge mechanism in SVN.
Ofcourse I've used svn switch --relocate, how else. Still the subdirectory did not update from the new server. Yes I know svn info to see what the server is.
You might call it FUD but it is exactly what happened a few weeks ago.
We've been using subversion for two years now, and are not impressed. As for your other backend suggestion: maybe you're right. I don't have the time to keep playing with different options for a revision control system. If there is one thing that needs to be rock solid, it's my version control. At least CVS is reliable, without having to fiddle with settings and options.
Call me when subversion is ready for real world use; maybe right now this is the case, but once bitten, twice shy. I can live with the limitations of CVS, I am not ready for the hidden troubles we get with Subversion.
Considering all the praise we read about Subversion, and its compelling features list, we switched a medium size project (80000 loc) from CVS to SVN. All in all we are not impressed with Subversion, and are not going to use it for new projects (for the forseeable future).
The bad things:
svn import: oops, there is a some experiment data in the directory, or an AAP subdirectory. Shit, the repository has grown by another 100 MB. No way to get it out again, unless you convert the whole BDB database to text, find your accidental additions, cut it out, rebuild the database, do svnadmin recover, fix all the permissions.
Really wrong error messages.
svn add * svn rm *.log (oops added some test runs) svn commit
" unable to get lock on file blabla". You'll now have to manually do svn rm... on every file you accidentally added. The only way to know which ones, is by committing and waiting for the error.
Big errors:
Having moved our repository to another server, we have had situations where a subdirectory was pointing to the new server, and its parent to the old server. When we did an svn update in the subdirectory, the updates would not happen and no error whatsover was given. Worse, to prevent this kind of problems, we had renamed the repos directory on the server, so that there was no way some dangling old links could accidentally access it.
Adding files to a repository from multiple places around the lab has gotten us often into troubles
The Berkeley DB format keeps changing. You can't just copy one to a server with a slightly different svn version. Worse: it will not tell you that there is a version difference, it will just try, and come up with the most irrelevant error messages.
All in all, we find SVN not ready for prime time. Its promises are great, but at least CVS is just working reliably.
This code is going into the Space Station (Declic), version control is a must for us.
HP65 when I was 12 or so, my father had one. What a wonderful calculator, with the magnetic strips for 100 program steps. Next a fake Apple][ when I was 18, that was sold in an electronics shop in Amsterdam, and then a Mac+. PDP11 in between at polytech.
The Apple was especially fun when I bought it, because I had no monitor (I didn't realize you couldn't connect it to a TV). First i figured out how to make it beep, and then I blindly typed a program so that it beeped. That was nice, it actually worked!. Then I started disassembling my portable TV, because it seemed that you could just connect the video from the Apple to the TV, provided you worked at signal voltage. So I connect some coax to some voltage somewhere within the TV, and voila, an computer display. So next I learn to program in basic. That was nice, but bloody slow, so I want to use assembly. By then I'd used a real assembler on an 8051, so I knew what it should be able to do. But I had ZERO software for the Apple, and no one I knew has one either. What does one do? Well you write an assembler in SoftBasic (builtin in rom) ofcourse. This way I could finally program "Life" so that it ran fast enough to actually see the generations flip.
for instance in generating documents, real power uses would use Framemaker or something else that is stable and reliable. No it is the marketing dweeps, and the PHB's that caused the proliferation of features in Office applications.
The PC has always been more powerful than a Mac and at various times in history much more powerful.
You are quite wrong. In the time of the MacIIci, you could do quite decent image processing, using Think-C, with linearly adressed memory, on the 68030 (20? forgot) of the Mac.
On the pc, you were stuck with malloc's limited to 64k, and all kinds of problems just adressing the vga screen.
I know this for sure, because it was the main reason we bought Macs at that time.
I think the treatment of mac users with the change from Word 5.1 to Word 6.0 alienated ALL Mac users in one stroke
Word 5.1 used to be the word processor for Macs, and is probably still the best Word version ever. Word 6.0 was supposed to be PowerMac native, and everyone was looking forward to it.
It is the first and only piece of software were I used the original install floppies for something else within 1 hour of installing this piece of shit software.
Andy Ikhnatho compared Word 6 to throwing anthrax into your neighbors barbecue.
If you new anything about Linux distros, you'd know that for instance a recent SuSE install will get updates from the server, before it has even booted from the harddisk. The system at this time is running from a DVD, with/tmp on a ramdisk. Only after it has downloaded and applied the patches it will boot from your now patched harddisk.
You shouldn't talk nonsense, but then again, if you want to look like a fool, that's your problem.
Flash as a technology is fine. The only problem is that it breaks the hyperlinked web, which means that the more data is in flash, the more impossible it becomes to find it.
Fortunately, there is hardly any meaningful information Flash only, so for now it is not a problem.
If you don't believe me, go to Jakob Nielsen's site, and see for yourself. useit.com
Yeah right! At the time, forward looking companies such as Apple and Motorola were putting together real processors (68k) and real operating systems, that offered far more legroom. The same can be seen with ide vs scsi. Ide is a hopelessly complicated format where every few years they reorganized the meaning of heads/sectors/tracks to get another doubling of storage. In the meantime the clean scsi protocol was fine, and worked out of the box, ALWAYS.
Mister Gates (although I think it was IBM actually) made a shortsighted decision, that has hindered pc software development tremendously in its early years.
You are BLIND. If I cannot get a single brandname pc vendor to sell me a pc, without Windows (I'm a Linux developer), then it's obvious that Microsoft has a monopoly. I ended up buying pc parts, and having someone assemble the thing for me.
Your second paragraph is exactly what is happening. Have you looked at the price of MS-Office recently? The price IS in the stratosphere. Why, because by bundling Office with every pc, they pretty much force everyone to use it (Way to go OpenOffice!).
And third, people ARE slowly moving to get away from M$! Great.
Slashdot Mirror
Get your facts straight. The Apple][ ofcourse!!!! The Lisa was years later.
Hi our little Space Station project. Maybe your project isn't mission critical, but mine is at least pretty high on the list.
:-)
Bart
Yep, I did
I was very enthusiastic at first, but after a few days that went away. The render_partial stuff can lead to very hard to track bugs, where you're not sure what object you're in. I've had one bug where I literally put a debug statement on every line of a partial template function in order to find out what went wrong. It turned out that I'd forgotten two (), and was now instantiating a variable instead off accessing the setter function. Which leads me to a problem I have with Ruby: the fact that function calls do not need (). Syntactically this is confusing.
Ok, I was a Ruby newbie, but I'm a very experienced programmer, using currently C, C++, Tcl, Python, Java, PHP, Awk, and some others.
This automagic stuff of Rails might seem nice, but i'd hate to use it on a larger project; the lack of visibility of which functions exist will lead to major problems.
Bart
When I started using SVN there was only Berkeley DB. It was extolled as the best thing ever.... I don't wanna try anything on my version control system. Are yous suggesting that using the BDB is not using SVN correctly? If so, they should remove the option from the tool, and make very clear to all users that they should upgrade.
I don't feel like trying if fsfs will be reliable, I am not in the business of usertesting version control systems.
Anyway, thanks for your tips, which I am well aware of since I moved from one version of BDB to another (remember my first post).
Also, I have the printed manual of subversion on my desk, and did read most of it, especially when we ran into trouble. blog nicely points out some of the problems I have, including the non-existent branch/merge mechanism in SVN.
Bart
Ofcourse I've used svn switch --relocate, how else. Still the subdirectory did not update from the new server. Yes I know svn info to see what the server is.
You might call it FUD but it is exactly what happened a few weeks ago.
We've been using subversion for two years now, and are not impressed. As for your other backend suggestion: maybe you're right. I don't have the time to keep playing with different options for a revision control system. If there is one thing that needs to be rock solid, it's my version control. At least CVS is reliable, without having to fiddle with settings and options.
Call me when subversion is ready for real world use; maybe right now this is the case, but once bitten, twice shy. I can live with the limitations of CVS, I am not ready for the hidden troubles we get with Subversion.
Bart
Considering all the praise we read about Subversion, and its compelling features list, we switched a medium size project (80000 loc) from CVS to SVN. All in all we are not impressed with Subversion, and are not going to use it for new projects (for the forseeable future).
The bad things:
svn import: oops, there is a some experiment data in the directory, or an AAP subdirectory. Shit, the repository has grown by another 100 MB. No way to get it out again, unless you convert the whole BDB database to text, find your accidental additions, cut it out, rebuild the database, do svnadmin recover, fix all the permissions.
Really wrong error messages.
" unable to get lock on file blabla". You'll now have to manually do svn rmBig errors:
Having moved our repository to another server, we have had situations where a subdirectory was pointing to the new server, and its parent to the old server. When we did an svn update in the subdirectory, the updates would not happen and no error whatsover was given. Worse, to prevent this kind of problems, we had renamed the repos directory on the server, so that there was no way some dangling old links could accidentally access it.
Adding files to a repository from multiple places around the lab has gotten us often into troubles
The Berkeley DB format keeps changing. You can't just copy one to a server with a slightly different svn version. Worse: it will not tell you that there is a version difference, it will just try, and come up with the most irrelevant error messages.
All in all, we find SVN not ready for prime time. Its promises are great, but at least CVS is just working reliably.
This code is going into the Space Station (Declic), version control is a must for us.
Yo
HP65 when I was 12 or so, my father had one. What a wonderful calculator, with the magnetic strips for 100 program steps. Next a fake Apple][ when I was 18, that was sold in an electronics shop in Amsterdam, and then a Mac+. PDP11 in between at polytech.
The Apple was especially fun when I bought it, because I had no monitor (I didn't realize you couldn't connect it to a TV). First i figured out how to make it beep, and then I blindly typed a program so that it beeped. That was nice, it actually worked!. Then I started disassembling my portable TV, because it seemed that you could just connect the video from the Apple to the TV, provided you worked at signal voltage. So I connect some coax to some voltage somewhere within the TV, and voila, an computer display.
So next I learn to program in basic. That was nice, but bloody slow, so I want to use assembly. By then I'd used a real assembler on an 8051, so I knew what it should be able to do. But I had ZERO software for the Apple, and no one I knew has one either. What does one do? Well you write an assembler in SoftBasic (builtin in rom) ofcourse. This way I could finally program "Life" so that it ran fast enough to actually see the generations flip.
The rest is history. I've been a hacker since.
Bye
Bart
Nonsense
for instance in generating documents, real power uses would use Framemaker or something else that is stable and reliable. No it is the marketing dweeps, and the PHB's that caused the proliferation of features in Office applications.
Bart
You are quite wrong. In the time of the MacIIci, you could do quite decent image processing, using Think-C, with linearly adressed memory, on the 68030 (20? forgot) of the Mac.
On the pc, you were stuck with malloc's limited to 64k, and all kinds of problems just adressing the vga screen.
I know this for sure, because it was the main reason we bought Macs at that time.
I think the treatment of mac users with the change from Word 5.1 to Word 6.0 alienated ALL Mac users in one stroke
Word 5.1 used to be the word processor for Macs, and is probably still the best Word version ever. Word 6.0 was supposed to be PowerMac native, and everyone was looking forward to it.
It is the first and only piece of software were I used the original install floppies for something else within 1 hour of installing this piece of shit software.
Andy Ikhnatho compared Word 6 to throwing anthrax into your neighbors barbecue.
If you new anything about Linux distros, you'd know that for instance a recent SuSE install will get updates from the server, before it has even booted from the harddisk. The system at this time is running from a DVD, with /tmp on a ramdisk. Only after it has downloaded and applied the patches it will boot from your now patched harddisk.
You shouldn't talk nonsense, but then again, if you want to look like a fool, that's your problem.
Bart van Deenen
Just installed it, and it works fine. Scrolling with the weel also, same in fileselection boxes.
Bart
2 lost space shuttles on some 100 flights isn't safe by any means.
Flash as a technology is fine. The only problem is that it breaks the hyperlinked web, which means that the more data is in flash, the more impossible it becomes to find it.
Fortunately, there is hardly any meaningful information Flash only, so for now it is not a problem.
If you don't believe me, go to Jakob Nielsen's site, and see for yourself.
useit.com
Bart
Yeah, if you're a yank or brit.
:-)
If you're from the Caribean, you'd say wee-wee-two, which is quite a bit quicker.
If you're French you say 'double vay', but since for them it's 'deuxieme guerre mondiale' it's another story anyhow.
Yeah right! At the time, forward looking companies such as Apple and Motorola were putting together real processors (68k) and real operating systems, that offered far more legroom. The same can be seen with ide vs scsi. Ide is a hopelessly complicated format where every few years they reorganized the meaning of heads/sectors/tracks to get another doubling of storage. In the meantime the clean scsi protocol was fine, and worked out of the box, ALWAYS.
Mister Gates (although I think it was IBM actually) made a shortsighted decision, that has hindered pc software development tremendously in its early years.
You are BLIND. If I cannot get a single brandname pc vendor to sell me a pc, without Windows (I'm a Linux developer), then it's obvious that Microsoft has a monopoly.
I ended up buying pc parts, and having someone assemble the thing for me.
Your second paragraph is exactly what is happening. Have you looked at the price of MS-Office recently? The price IS in the stratosphere. Why, because by bundling Office with every pc, they pretty much force everyone to use it (Way to go OpenOffice!).
And third, people ARE slowly moving to get away from M$! Great.