Home » Eclipse Projects » Subversive » End-user point of view
| End-user point of view [message #3870] |
Fri, 04 August 2006 09:23  |
 Olivier Jaquemet
Messages: 1
Registered: July 2009 |
Junior Member |
|
|
I'm currently starting a quick internal evaluation of the solutions
available and their maturity for SVN integration in Eclipse.
Here is what I have to say so far (like others said before, my intention
is not to start a flame war subclipse vs subversion):
- As far as the user interface and user feature are concerned, Subversive
seems really easier to start with (nice dialog and configuration windows,
automatic management of trunk, tags, branches, revision). Thus it would
make a really good start for a Eclipse SVN default plugin.
- Regarding server's connexion, plugin stability and integration with
subversion, Subclipse seems to be definetly more mature and stable (for
example, working svn+ssh). Not to mention, as said before on this
newsgroup, that the subclipse developpers have more possibility to change
and add features to subversion.
So my two penies regarding all this, would be to accept this proposal in
order for both teams to immediately start working on a common project. For
the end users, having the features/gui of subversive, with the solid and
stable base of subclipse would be great.
I sincerly hope you (Eclipse, Subversive and Subclipse teams) can manage
to converge on a common view!
|
|
|
| Re: End-user point of view [message #4101 is a reply to message #3870] |
Sat, 05 August 2006 00:28  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: michael.novemberain.com
> For
> the end users, having the features/gui of subversive, with the solid
> and
> stable base of subclipse would be great.
> I sincerly hope you (Eclipse, Subversive and Subclipse teams) can
> manage
> to converge on a common view!
Absolutely. +1
WBR,
Michael Klishin
mailto:michael@novemberain.com
|
|
|
| Re: End-user point of view [message #4298 is a reply to message #4101] |
Tue, 08 August 2006 09:53 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: c.hoehne.bafz.de
Am 05.08.2006, 02:28 Uhr, schrieb Michael Klishin
<michael@novemberain.com>:
I cannot agree to this:
>> For
>> the end users, having the features/gui of subversive, with the solid
>> and
>> stable base of subclipse would be great.
>> I sincerly hope you (Eclipse, Subversive and Subclipse teams) can
>> manage
>> to converge on a common view!
>
> Absolutely. +1
>
> WBR,
> Michael Klishin
> mailto:michael@novemberain.com
>
>
I have installed subversive 1.0.1 and tested it thoroughly.
1. The gui is very similar to the CVS provider. Personally i do not like
this style. So i vote against to use subversives gui for a starting point.
2. I have had some problems in checking out projects. I suggest that i was
using subversion in the past to much. And i am happy with subversion. For
me, subversive uses the CVS-way to much.
I have administered CVS repositorys and i was used to use CVS. But as soon
as subversion appears i switched to subversion. I do like its new ideas of
working. I will never switch back.
My personal mind goes in the direction that an Eclipse svn team provider
should offer a great gui for newcomers (people who do not know any version
control system). This gui should be so good that people with experience in
other version control systems could easily migrate.
The gui from subversive does not meet this requirement. That is solely my
own opinion.
Ciao,
Carsten
|
|
| |
| Re: End-user point of view [message #4645 is a reply to message #4575] |
Wed, 09 August 2006 06:48 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: c.hoehne.bafz.de
Am 08.08.2006, 19:13 Uhr, schrieb Konstantin Scheglov
<kscheglov@gmail.com>:
> Carsten Hoehne wrote:
>
>> I have installed subversive 1.0.1 and tested it thoroughly.
>> 1. The gui is very similar to the CVS provider. Personally i do not
>> like this style. So i vote against to use subversives gui for a
>> starting point.
>> 2. I have had some problems in checking out projects. I suggest that i
>> was using subversion in the past to much. And i am happy with
>> subversion. For me, subversive uses the CVS-way to much.
>
> So, do you think that CVS support in Eclipse is bad?
>
> Should we throw away existing CVS support from Eclipse and switch to
> some other implementation? Or may be switch to other IDE?
>
The answer is easy:
For CVS support there is the CVS TEAM Provider
For subversion support there are the known proposals.
What i do not want is to use subversion with a gui limited to the cvs
plugin.
e.g. subversive and the cvs plugin both displays only the revision of a
file.
I'd like to see the date/time of this release. I could extend this list.
Whoever want to use CVS could use the existing plugin.
Subversion (is) will be a superset of CVS. So it is no good idea to limit
its gui to CVS.
BTW: The team provider interface of eclipse is, and should be, independent
of the used version control system.
Ciao,
Carsten
--
Erstellt mit Operas revolutionärem E-Mail-Modul: http://www.opera.com/mail/
|
|
|
| Re: End-user point of view [message #4713 is a reply to message #4645] |
Wed, 09 August 2006 12:13 |
Igor Vinnykov
Messages: 61
Registered: July 2009 |
Member |
|
|
Dear Carsten,
> What i do not want is to use subversion with a gui limited to the cvs
> plugin.
There are simple rules, which we follow during creation of Subversive UI:
1. For the functionality, which exists both in CVS and SVN we make UI close
to CVS implementation. Reasons - CVS UI is very usable and it's important to
use same approaches, which simplify users switch from CVS to SVN and back.
2. When we add some SVN unique functionality we try to make it in Eclipse UI
style. It's naturally when different parts of application, even external
ones like Subversive, are organized in the same style. When user switch to
SVN plugin he shouldn't feel that he use some external tool. We are in
Eclipse world, so should follow it's rules and don't try just to integrate
clone of TortoiseSVN or other SVN client to Eclipse IDE.
Please share you thoughs with us about possible limitations which you see.
> e.g. subversive and the cvs plugin both displays only the revision of a
> file.
> I'd like to see the date/time of this release. I could extend this list.
It's not related with limitations. You can customize Subversive and CVS as
you want. Open Windows > Preferences > Team > CVS (or SVN) > Label
Decorations and in tab Text Decorations customize labels as preferred.
> Subversion (is) will be a superset of CVS. So it is no good idea to limit
> its gui to CVS.
You can just compare Subversive and CVS functionality feature-by-feature to
realize that Subversive reuse useful CVS approaches, but oriented to SVN
functionality and has a lot of SVN-specific features. So from my point of
your unrest have no grounds.
Best regards,
Igor Vinnykov
|
|
|
| Re: End-user point of view [message #5191 is a reply to message #3870] |
Sun, 27 August 2006 22:56 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: reavertm.poczta.fm
I have been using Subclipse as well as Subversive for some time and I would
add my pennies to this whole discussion.
My notes about Subclipse:
- has nice and rich interface
- it feels like it's performing slightly faster that subversive, when using
JavaHL
- unfortunately, I can't tell whether it's already fixed in new versions - I
had terrible problems with refactoring subversion controlled code using
Subclipse, refactoring like moving packages, renaming classes etc. It just
occasionally crashed with some NullPointerException related to file list,
file name or something like that. Beside this, when some project is under
version control but source files aren't, Subclipse used to ask whether to
add newly created files to SVN or not - which is good of course. During
refactorization though, Subclipse did actually *add* *some* files to
version control without asking (as it had nothing to do with
predictability - I consider it as bug) messing my working copy. Also a
friend of my, the leader of the project I'm currently involved in, has some
other problems with Subclipse using JavaHL, this time under Windows (as I'm
using Linux exclusively) but he's not "offensive" as I am so he just gave
up and switched to TortoiseSVN as he has (under Windows) good stable, well
integrated into filemanager alternative.
My notes about Subversive
- well, it just works
I'm really not about starting flame wars and I don't know whether anyone
experienced similar "difficulties" with Subclipse. I believe that current
release of Subclipse is stable as rock - but... I just don't want to take
risk again. Yes, maybe I'm exaggregating a bit. Well I just want to have
stable tool I can work with without worry.
> I'm currently starting a quick internal evaluation of the solutions
> available and their maturity for SVN integration in Eclipse.
>
> Here is what I have to say so far (like others said before, my intention
> is not to start a flame war subclipse vs subversion):
> - As far as the user interface and user feature are concerned, Subversive
> seems really easier to start with (nice dialog and configuration windows,
> automatic management of trunk, tags, branches, revision). Thus it would
> make a really good start for a Eclipse SVN default plugin.
[cut]
> - Regarding server's connexion, plugin stability and integration with
> subversion, Subclipse seems to be definetly more mature and stable (for
> example, working svn+ssh).
^^^^
I personally cannot evaluate that one as I'm running subversion with WebDAV
over SSL and Subversive has nothing to blame here.
I *really* think the stability issues are *far* more important that GUI
aspects here so this days I would favor Subversive over Subclipse as it
just works flawlessly, at least for me.
Anyway, it's quite unusual thing IMHO that company providing alternative
subversion Eclipse plug-in is proposing it as official Eclipse Project
plugin, having less let's call it community experience. I mean Subversive
is available since May 2006, correct me if I'm wrong. And suddenly Polarion
team is proposing their quite new product as standard while they're not
even standard de-facto. And that's the point where all this bad atmosphere
is about - no one wants to abandon his project. I can really understand
what Subclipse developers can feel now - it's like someone is going to take
something from them or do something behind their backs, so all this
competition - Subclipse team is going to propose their product as Eclipse
standard SVN team provider.
Summarizing, the situation is difficult. I really think that Polarion
shouldn't have proposed Subversive as Eclipse standard just not to create
bad atmosphere in Open Source community, especially when there is already a
mature (maybe not perfect) alternative. I would be happy enough having good
Eclipse SVN support provided by non proprietary plug-in as it is now.
[Just in any case, sorry for my english, I'm not native speaker here]
regards
Maciej Mrozowski
SMTSoftware
http://www.smtsoftware.com
|
|
|
| Re: End-user point of view [message #6544 is a reply to message #3870] |
Mon, 13 November 2006 18:51 |
Igor Vinnykov
Messages: 61
Registered: July 2009 |
Member |
|
|
Dear Oliver,
Regarding mentioned problems with server connection, etc. - they were
related in some cases with JavaSVN client library. Now Subversive provides
an ability to switch between JavaHL, standard and extended JavaSVN, so I
suppose that selecting of appropriate client library should resolve some of
your problems.
Regarding the joint solution - we will be happy to to work on it and already
made steps towards it. You can find more about that topic in this newsgroup.
Best regards,
Igor Vinnykov
Subversive Team
"Olivier Jaquemet" <olivier.jaquemet@jalios.com> ???????/???????? ? ????????
?????????: news:b9ab07e17945fffcab7726b1b5b6eaf2$1@www.eclipse.org...
> I'm currently starting a quick internal evaluation of the solutions
> available and their maturity for SVN integration in Eclipse.
>
> Here is what I have to say so far (like others said before, my intention
> is not to start a flame war subclipse vs subversion):
> - As far as the user interface and user feature are concerned, Subversive
> seems really easier to start with (nice dialog and configuration windows,
> automatic management of trunk, tags, branches, revision). Thus it would
> make a really good start for a Eclipse SVN default plugin.
> - Regarding server's connexion, plugin stability and integration with
> subversion, Subclipse seems to be definetly more mature and stable (for
> example, working svn+ssh). Not to mention, as said before on this
> newsgroup, that the subclipse developpers have more possibility to change
> and add features to subversion.
>
> So my two penies regarding all this, would be to accept this proposal in
> order for both teams to immediately start working on a common project. For
> the end users, having the features/gui of subversive, with the solid and
> stable base of subclipse would be great.
> I sincerly hope you (Eclipse, Subversive and Subclipse teams) can manage
> to converge on a common view!
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: End-user point of view [message #6563 is a reply to message #5191] |
Mon, 13 November 2006 19:27 |
Igor Vinnykov
Messages: 61
Registered: July 2009 |
Member |
|
|
Dear Maciej,
I try to address your concerns. Yes, really Subversive was firstly appeared
on public in March 2006 and in June 2006 it was proposed as Eclipse
technology project. There are few reasons behind:
1. Subversive was planned to be proposed for inclusion into the Eclipse
Platform since separation as a standalone project. Yes, right, Subclipse
exists before, but it was not planned to include into Eclipse Platform. But
community really demans this, so we proposed our solution of this problem.
After publishing of the Subversive proposal on the eclipse.org Subclipse
authors changed their opinion and posted own proposal.
2. Inspite it looks like a fresh tool Subversive was complete enough,
because it was previously succesfully used near half of year internally in
the company. It becomes a very popular during short period of time, so we
saw that it was right time to publish a proposal.
Now Subversive has tens of thouthands users, it is actively developed, so I
think that there are no grounds to talk that all this community will be
abandoned - we have in plans to develop SVN team provider in future.
Regarding the way how we can resolve situation with two concurrent
proposals: you can evaluate our proposal and this newsgroup where we
published our vision how to handle it. For us it doesn't matter which part
of what project will be included to joint solution - the only criteria for
us is the code quality and solution completeness. I hope that we can find a
right way.
Best regards,
Igor Vinnykov
Subversive Team
> I *really* think the stability issues are *far* more important that GUI
> aspects here so this days I would favor Subversive over Subclipse as it
> just works flawlessly, at least for me.
>
> Anyway, it's quite unusual thing IMHO that company providing alternative
> subversion Eclipse plug-in is proposing it as official Eclipse Project
> plugin, having less let's call it community experience. I mean Subversive
> is available since May 2006, correct me if I'm wrong. And suddenly
> Polarion
> team is proposing their quite new product as standard while they're not
> even standard de-facto. And that's the point where all this bad atmosphere
> is about - no one wants to abandon his project. I can really understand
> what Subclipse developers can feel now - it's like someone is going to
> take
> something from them or do something behind their backs, so all this
> competition - Subclipse team is going to propose their product as Eclipse
> standard SVN team provider.
> Summarizing, the situation is difficult. I really think that Polarion
> shouldn't have proposed Subversive as Eclipse standard just not to create
> bad atmosphere in Open Source community, especially when there is already
> a
> mature (maybe not perfect) alternative. I would be happy enough having
> good
> Eclipse SVN support provided by non proprietary plug-in as it is now.
>
> [Just in any case, sorry for my english, I'm not native speaker here]
>
> regards
>
> Maciej Mrozowski
> SMTSoftware
> http://www.smtsoftware.com
>
|
|
|
| Re: End-user point of view [message #7315 is a reply to message #3870] |
Sat, 28 April 2007 01:01 |
Werner Keil
Messages: 1087
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Olivier Jaquemet wrote:
> I'm currently starting a quick internal evaluation of the solutions
> available and their maturity for SVN integration in Eclipse.
>
> Here is what I have to say so far (like others said before, my intention
> is not to start a flame war subclipse vs subversion):
> - As far as the user interface and user feature are concerned,
> Subversive seems really easier to start with (nice dialog and
> configuration windows, automatic management of trunk, tags, branches,
> revision). Thus it would make a really good start for a Eclipse SVN
> default plugin.
> - Regarding server's connexion, plugin stability and integration with
> subversion, Subclipse seems to be definetly more mature and stable (for
> example, working svn+ssh). Not to mention, as said before on this
> newsgroup, that the subclipse developpers have more possibility to
> change and add features to subversion.
>
> So my two penies regarding all this, would be to accept this proposal in
> order for both teams to immediately start working on a common project.
> For the end users, having the features/gui of subversive, with the solid
> and stable base of subclipse would be great.
> I sincerly hope you (Eclipse, Subversive and Subclipse teams) can manage
> to converge on a common view!
>
>
I had some similar experiences working with both though Subclipse has
been far more common and established until recently.
The handling of e.g. Tags seems better, but at least when I last gave it
a try one could only store one tag per project.
On the other hand, Subversive has been hard to impossible to use with
certain Proxy and Firewall systems in use.
There Subclipse is clearly the only productive alternative.
If Eclipse really needs 2 competing projects in such a specific niche,
well time will tell...
|
|
|
| Re: End-user point of view [message #7326 is a reply to message #7315] |
Sat, 28 April 2007 06:56 |
|
Now that Subclipse has withdrawn their proposal, we will have two
competing solutions. In my experience, competition is a good thing and
the end user is often the winner. This is very true in Open Source as well.
Regards,
Thomas Hallgren
Werner Keil wrote:
> Olivier Jaquemet wrote:
>> I'm currently starting a quick internal evaluation of the solutions
>> available and their maturity for SVN integration in Eclipse.
>>
>> Here is what I have to say so far (like others said before, my intention
>> is not to start a flame war subclipse vs subversion):
>> - As far as the user interface and user feature are concerned,
>> Subversive seems really easier to start with (nice dialog and
>> configuration windows, automatic management of trunk, tags, branches,
>> revision). Thus it would make a really good start for a Eclipse SVN
>> default plugin.
>> - Regarding server's connexion, plugin stability and integration with
>> subversion, Subclipse seems to be definetly more mature and stable (for
>> example, working svn+ssh). Not to mention, as said before on this
>> newsgroup, that the subclipse developpers have more possibility to
>> change and add features to subversion.
>>
>> So my two penies regarding all this, would be to accept this proposal in
>> order for both teams to immediately start working on a common project.
>> For the end users, having the features/gui of subversive, with the solid
>> and stable base of subclipse would be great.
>> I sincerly hope you (Eclipse, Subversive and Subclipse teams) can manage
>> to converge on a common view!
>>
>>
>
> I had some similar experiences working with both though Subclipse has
> been far more common and established until recently.
>
> The handling of e.g. Tags seems better, but at least when I last gave it
> a try one could only store one tag per project.
>
> On the other hand, Subversive has been hard to impossible to use with
> certain Proxy and Firewall systems in use.
>
> There Subclipse is clearly the only productive alternative.
> If Eclipse really needs 2 competing projects in such a specific niche,
> well time will tell...
|
|
|
| Re: End-user point of view [message #7337 is a reply to message #7326] |
Sat, 28 April 2007 10:54 |
Werner Keil
Messages: 1087
Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Not sure, what they have withdrawn, but it seems, they don't want to
cooperate any more right now?
For technical excellence and diversity this (more is better) is clearly
good. And also offers a vital contrast to the Microsoft world, where in
some cases only their own solution and opinion gets pushed through (well
unless major vendors like Dell stand up against them and their plans to
abandon Windows XP or similar occasions ;-)
However, I doubt at this point any major packages and distributions
including that of the Eclipse Foundation itself (like Europa) are going
to offer 2 competing team vendors for one version control system at a time.
That would just confuse users. And I am talking as someone who had both
installed in the same project and workspace for a while...
Thomas Hallgren wrote:
> Now that Subclipse has withdrawn their proposal, we will have two
> competing solutions. In my experience, competition is a good thing and
> the end user is often the winner. This is very true in Open Source as well.
>
> Regards,
> Thomas Hallgren
>
>
>
> Werner Keil wrote:
>> Olivier Jaquemet wrote:
>>> I'm currently starting a quick internal evaluation of the solutions
>>> available and their maturity for SVN integration in Eclipse.
>>>
>>> Here is what I have to say so far (like others said before, my intention
>>> is not to start a flame war subclipse vs subversion):
>>> - As far as the user interface and user feature are concerned,
>>> Subversive seems really easier to start with (nice dialog and
>>> configuration windows, automatic management of trunk, tags, branches,
>>> revision). Thus it would make a really good start for a Eclipse SVN
>>> default plugin.
>>> - Regarding server's connexion, plugin stability and integration with
>>> subversion, Subclipse seems to be definetly more mature and stable (for
>>> example, working svn+ssh). Not to mention, as said before on this
>>> newsgroup, that the subclipse developpers have more possibility to
>>> change and add features to subversion.
>>>
>>> So my two penies regarding all this, would be to accept this proposal in
>>> order for both teams to immediately start working on a common project.
>>> For the end users, having the features/gui of subversive, with the solid
>>> and stable base of subclipse would be great.
>>> I sincerly hope you (Eclipse, Subversive and Subclipse teams) can manage
>>> to converge on a common view!
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I had some similar experiences working with both though Subclipse has
>> been far more common and established until recently.
>>
>> The handling of e.g. Tags seems better, but at least when I last gave it
>> a try one could only store one tag per project.
>>
>> On the other hand, Subversive has been hard to impossible to use with
>> certain Proxy and Firewall systems in use.
>>
>> There Subclipse is clearly the only productive alternative.
>> If Eclipse really needs 2 competing projects in such a specific niche,
>> well time will tell...
|
|
|
| Re: End-user point of view [message #7348 is a reply to message #7337] |
Sat, 28 April 2007 13:25 |
|
Werner Keil wrote:
> Not sure, what they have withdrawn, but it seems, they don't want to
> cooperate any more right now?
>
They withdrew their proposal. You can read the reasons behind the
decision here http://subclipse.tigris.org/eclipse-proposal.html
> However, I doubt at this point any major packages and distributions
> including that of the Eclipse Foundation itself (like Europa) are going
> to offer 2 competing team vendors for one version control system at a time.
>
Everything delivered in Europa (or by other means delivered by the
Eclipse foundation) must be approved by the Eclipse IP process. So no,
Subclipse will not be part of that. I think it will be hard for
Subversive to get all approvals in time for Europa too. What's the
status of that?
Regards,
Thomas Hallgren
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Fri Apr 26 10:54:43 GMT 2024
Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03123 seconds |
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
