Is this group still alive? If so, can it be cleaned up?
Brian Moelk
my projects that need version control type of functionality.
But, it doesn't sit well with me that this google group needs to be
cleaned up. What's going on here?
-Brian
Ari Brown
On Aug 7, 2010, at 4:49 PM, Brian Moelk wrote:
> I'm definitely interested in looking at incorporating AMP into some of
> my projects that need version control type of functionality.
Let's talk this out, because I have a feeling that the API might change soon (subtly, but still). Can you sketch out what YOU'D like use as the API for your application?
That said, you could probably just go ahead and start using Amp, because it's ready for a bit of action. Let me know if you run into any bugs or if you want something cleaned up. Seriously, if you want even 3 lines added, either patch it yourself or let us know, and we'll do it.
> But, it doesn't sit well with me that this google group needs to be
> cleaned up. What's going on here?
I don't have the password to the google group, so I'm not sure how to do that. Mike does, but Mike is usually pretty busy now with his job.
Brian Moelk
The basic use case we're looking at is to have some kind of version
control on JSON documents for a CMS. This isn't necessarily the
primary feature of a CMS, but it certainly is a nice/important
feature.
The first cut I played with used git, but it seemed somewhat awkward
to integrate. Not too bad, but too great either. I'm keen on getting
something with tighter/cleaner integration with Ruby so I figured I
should take a look around. I do like the idea of git not having a
centralized server and having the repository stashed under .git, so
I'm hoping AMP will provide similar options.
Regards,
-Brian
Ari Brown
On Aug 7, 2010, at 8:26 PM, Brian Moelk wrote:
> The first cut I played with used git, but it seemed somewhat awkward
> to integrate. Not too bad, but too great either. I'm keen on getting
> something with tighter/cleaner integration with Ruby so I figured I
> should take a look around. I do like the idea of git not having a
> centralized server and having the repository stashed under .git, so
> I'm hoping AMP will provide similar options.
The mercurial support is up and running _right now_, but the git support isn't. If you're down with using mercurial (and once the git support is in you won't have any trouble switching), you're good to go.
Take a look at the README for using it. It's simple, straightforward, and pain free. Actually, the README might not be your best resource (note to self...), so look at the bugs/ directory, and check out anything there. THOSE are files that are actually tested and checked against (although only 24.rb seems to be working... hm...)
bugs/24.rb is your friend and actually works. Sample:
repo.staging_area.add 'Ampfile' # Add a file
repo.commit :modified => ['Ampfile'], :message => 'initial commit' # Commit
Also, please remember that amp is going through puberty right now. We're rewriting and reworking things currently so be patient. And file nice reproducible bug reports.
Michael Edgar
I've got a job now and I haven't been balancing it well. Plus, well, Google pays, and Amp doesn't (yet?). But I do want to keep working on it. Plus, I'm learning a shitton about software design and engineering which will pay back Amp in spades. I'll hook Ari up with admin rights so he can clean stuff up.
Long story short: Amp kicks ass and you should use it. It's still growing and not bug-free. If you're on Ruby 1.9, beware of Unicode, as well, Ruby 1.9 crapped in all of our pants in that regard.
Mike
Brian Moelk
format provided that it's simply a collection of files (easy to move/
backup) and I can get previous versions out of it. Our customers
won't care if it's git or mercurial or whatever, we just need to
deliver archived versions for them.
I'll take a look at the examples. Any rough timeline as to when AMP
will mature? I think the most important thing is stability of the
API. If you anticipate that it's reasonably stable now, I'll start
hacking away on it. And certainly if I find bugs, I'll submit them.
-Brian
Ari Brown
On Aug 8, 2010, at 7:41 PM, Brian Moelk wrote:
> I'll take a look at the examples. Any rough timeline as to when AMP
> will mature? I think the most important thing is stability of the
> API. If you anticipate that it's reasonably stable now, I'll start
> hacking away on it. And certainly if I find bugs, I'll submit them.
I would call the API reasonably stable. The internal API may shift, but the external one should remain relatively static.
Also, let us know if it could be changed in any way.
Patrick Aljord
commits, and showing diffs and files/blobs). Is that possible already
with amp?
About managing the group, you can go to the admin interface on the
google group and add more moderators so we can help you fight spams.
Ari Brown
On Aug 8, 2010, at 8:20 PM, Patrick Aljord wrote:
> I'm mostly interested in read-only access to git repo (listing repo,
> commits, and showing diffs and files/blobs). Is that possible already
> with amp?
Yup, you're all good in that respect. Once you start doing tricking things like branching after committing on two moves after sunday, things start to get hairy, but we can do simple things like what you asked easily and correctly.
Patrick Aljord
when there are conflicts)?
Michael Edgar
Patrick Aljord
> Merging currently works just fine, even with conflicts, with Mercurial repos.
>
Cool thanks, but I was asking about git.