Re: [ptp-user] A command and a question about Synchronized Projects in I

[Roland Schulz <roland@xxxxxxx>]

On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 6:57 PM, Corey Ashford <cjashfor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi Folks,

I am evaluating the different remote project capabilities in PTP, and
I'm currently looking at the "Synchronized Project" type.

Thanks for testing and the feedback!

I've played around with it a bit, and so far it looks pretty cool!  I
like how transparent it is in using Git (the only synchronization option
available, it appears) to synchronize the source and target directories.

There is no online help that I could find, so I had to take some guesses
as to how to set it up, but after doing that, it sort of "just worked"
and seems to be very fast and transparent.  I even threw an existing Git
project at it, and it worked without a hitch.

One concern I have about the way it uses Git: it seems to play fast and
loose with making commits, especially to existing Git trees.  My
intuition is that some people will find it objectionable.  If I was
working on a source tree that was maintained using Git, I think I would
be annoyed too, that I would have to collapse perhaps tens of commits
into one real one.

I had set up something similar, that synchronizes the host and target
source using a shared git tree.  The synchronization step was postponed
till a build was attempted, and instead of making an actual commit, a
list of of modified+staged files is created and then rsync'd to the
target.  At some point you want to commit your changes in a series of
one or more patches, and when you do that, you do a "git reset --hard"
on the target side, and then pull after the commit(s) are pushed from
the local side.  This followed a "master repo" set-up, but I think you
could adapt it for a peer-to-peer setup.

I'm not suggesting that you switch to a similar system, but eliminating
the large number of commits that are done to the tree would be a desired
feature.

Yes this is something on our TODO list. So far we were busy getting the sync to work and haven't optimized its coexistence with GIT (or other) version control mechanisms. The plan is to do the sync commit all in a special branch. Then before you want to do a real commit you would deactivate the sync and we would switch back to your originally branch. Than you can do a "real" commit (either with the EGit or the command line GIT).

Our current thoughts on this are here:
https://github.com/rolandschulz/PTP/issues/26
This is just some initial thoughts. The finial implementation might be very different.

Roland

-----

My question: Is there any capability to deal with remotely-located
include files (for example /usr/include/string.h) ?  I couldn't find any
way to add remotely-located paths.

Thanks for your consideration,

- Corey
_______________________________________________
ptp-user mailing list
ptp-user@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ptp-user

-- 
ORNL/UT Center for Molecular Biophysics cmb.ornl.gov
865-241-1537, ORNL PO BOX 2008 MS6309