World: r3wp

The greatest visibility these days is to be had on Github.

+1 for github

Ok, so this weekend, I'll put the new A110 source on it, to start 
there.

I'll post a blog to make sure everyone is tuned in on it.

From there Andreas can lead the way on how it should go.

Note that I already maintain a mirror of the R3 hostkit sources on 
Github:
http://github.com/rebolsource/r3-hostkit

Like various scripts to make the automation side of it work.

Maybe a good place to start if you want to play around a bit.

Ah, ok...

Should we just use that?

Fine with me.

The most important part is how to automatically get your commits 
to whatever place we use. Not which place we use.

Ok, great... saves some steps.

Are there already some scripts for accessing github r3-hostkit?

Also, can you point us to a concise summary of Git usage?  I've used 
CSV and SVN, but not Git.

Also, would be good to recommend a Git client for people to start 
with.

Git's primary UI is a CLI.

Use msysgit on Win32 and the packages provided with your system (or 
build from source) on everything else.

Great! Because all of my main distro systems here are Linux or BSD, 
those clients will be needed.

Alternatively, Github also has SVN access to their repos (in beta).

For SVN write access you'll need to create an account on Github, 
though. For Git write access, I can just add SSH keys which are allowed 
to write to a particular repos.

When installing git from distro packages, just make sure you get 
a Git newer than 1.6.0.

(That means on Debian Lenny, you better get the version from the 
lenny-packports.)

A "concise summary" may be a bit problematic, as distributed version 
control really is a bit of a paradigm shift compared to CVS or SVN.

http://gitref.org/has what many consider a very good tutorial. Concise 
it is not.

I found this helpful - http://www.eecs.harvard.edu/~cduan/technical/git/

One of the more concise tutorials is the one coming with Git itself, 
which you can also read at:
http://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/gittutorial.html

++ git ... and I I think someone has posted this here before.  http://whygitisbetterthanx.com/

Github is a good site, but there are a few issues, such as how they 
do not acknowledge the .r extension as Rebol.  I've gotten them to 
do .r2 .r3 and .rebol however.

I would like to see a similar site for Mercurial - it likely has 
advantages over Git, particularly on Windows.

There is a bug in the syntax highlighter GitHub is using (pygments) 
which causes infinite loops if you write comment [ ( ) ] .  Annoying 
but probably easy to fix if someone wanted to.

Bitbucket is the Github-clone for Mercurial.

Gitorious is not quite as "hip" as GitHub but the server code is 
open source, you can run it on your own machines if you feel like 
and modify it as needed: http://gitorious.org/

Git is small

 on Linux. But has to install half of the command line userspace of 
 Linux on Windows if you want to use it there (when last I checked).

It still does if you use msysgit. But not much of an issue unless 
you really care for download size.

(Or disk space.)

I am always running out of disk space, no matter how large a disk 
I get. But I was more disaproving of the vast number of dependencies.

but msysGit seems to manage all of that into a single download and 
install, so it seems to not be such an issue.  (not like MinGW which 
requires to use its rather obscure and poorly documented package 
downloader)

It just makes me distrust that site. What if the other "advantages" 
are just as completely incorrect?

Then look closer.

Git is Small
 is referring to repository size.

If you decide to go with Git because it is popular, cool, no problem. 
I haven't yet seen a good argument that Git is better (than Hg, at 
least), but popularity has its own advantages.

Github is a popularity argument. And a good demonstration of the 
advantages of popularity.

You realise that you can click on the headings and they expand to 
show more detail?

One of the things I like about Git, and am quite proud of, is the 
data structures are simple and you can reimplement it if you wish. 
It's a well-defined data model. There are Git-related projects like 
GUI tools, for example, with the Eclipse IDE.

   http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/print/9126619/Q_A_Linux_founder_Linus_Torvalds_talks_about_open_source_identity

Rebolgit?

Yeah, would be lovely :)

Yup, I read inside all the headings. I've just seen similar arguments 
against Git.

I've said before that a concrete and vetted reimplementation of an 
unnecessarily complicated (but popular) tool in Rebol to show how 
teeny it could get would spark great interest.

Another advantage of popularity is alternate implementations. There 
are even Java and .NET reimplementations of Git (that are likely 
smaller than the original Git even if you include the Java or .NET 
runtimes).