project-navigation
Personal tools

Author Topic: SVN issue  (Read 6155 times)

Offline rynait

  • Rookie
  • ***
  • Posts: 32
    • View Profile
SVN issue
« on: August 02, 2010, 08:40:21 pm »
Hello,

I was using 2.3 build (not trunk) to update version 2.3.  Noticed that th2000 added 200 files to 2.3 build. I compared the differences between 2.3 build and the trunk. 

I found that majority of 200 is un-necessary and is probably 'for' 2.4 development version.
 
This eventually resulted in wasted space and time on downloading 200 files.

Will someone please tell th2000 not to combine 200 files.  Just add bug fixed file to the 2.3 build, the same way it was done with 2.2.1 build.

Concerned R

Offline geever

  • Project Coder
  • PHALANX Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 2550
    • View Profile
Re: SVN issue
« Reply #1 on: August 02, 2010, 08:54:54 pm »
I was using 2.3 build (not trunk) to update version 2.3.  Noticed that th2000 added 200 files to 2.3 build. I compared the differences between 2.3 build and the trunk. 

Will someone please tell th2000 not to combine 200 files.  Just add bug fixed file to the 2.3 build, the same way it was done with 2.2.1 build.

What are you speaking about? Which revision?

Do you know (SVN) version management?
SVN merge sets svn:mergeinfo property for every other file too when you merge into a branch. It shows 200+ updated files but they will not be downloaded if only their property changed.

-geever

ps. Sorry, but I can't resist: Who the hell are you? What makes you think you can tell us how to manage our sourcecode?

Offline rynait

  • Rookie
  • ***
  • Posts: 32
    • View Profile
Re: SVN issue
« Reply #2 on: August 02, 2010, 09:07:10 pm »
Hello Geever.

Insults ('who hell are you') to me = gets no replies from me. I am not posting anything that can start flamewar.


SVN did download 200 files into my working 2.3 copy. What I did, reverted 2.3 working copy then compared the trunks. 

I wonder why can't you be polite, rather than insulting. (otherwise I repeat same thing I done in past,  promptly delete the entire post.)

Concerned R

Offline Thrashard96

  • Squad Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 260
    • View Profile
Re: SVN issue
« Reply #3 on: August 02, 2010, 09:35:05 pm »
For me everything is ok, but ufo2map takes too much time to unpack maps (480+ and i will need to restart the process on my 6 year old pc with 1 cpu thread)... It takes too long to do it... I will have to wait about a week to unpack, so maybe if i would post the files i need for you, could you post the finished installer to me?

Offline geever

  • Project Coder
  • PHALANX Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 2550
    • View Profile
Re: SVN issue
« Reply #4 on: August 02, 2010, 09:46:32 pm »
Sorry, I know, I could handle this better. Beg your pardon.
But to be honest I've found your post bit insulting.

Other people would be happy "the project is rolling on, new things come every day", not complaining about some kilobytes they download (which is not compulsory anyway). From your comment I think you haven't checked what kind of modifications were and judge if it was neccessary or not (and even if it wasn't let it be our decision.)

Wasn't me who committed that horribly much 200 files, but still let it be our decision what to commit and what not, please.

And finally once more I apologize for my bad temper.

R
-geever

Offline H-Hour

  • Administrator
  • PHALANX Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 1923
    • View Profile
Re: SVN issue
« Reply #5 on: August 02, 2010, 09:53:25 pm »
tlh2000 is mattn, and he's the lead developer. He's the one managing the 2.3 and 2.4 trunks, and if he committed changes on 200 files, he most likely did it for a reason. I realize that English probably isn't your first language, but you didn't demonstrate that you had any idea what was actually changed in the 200 files or why it might have been done, so we're going to assume mattn (thl2000) knew what he was doing.

That's why geever asjed you why you think you can tell the developers how to manage their source. And it's a fair question.

Offline Mattn

  • CaveExpress
  • Administrator
  • PHALANX Commander
  • *****
  • Posts: 4830
  • www.caveproductions.org
    • View Profile
    • CaveExpress
Re: SVN issue
« Reply #6 on: August 02, 2010, 10:14:37 pm »
you are not talking about the merge history from svn 1.6, no? only svn properties are changed there.

Offline rynait

  • Rookie
  • ***
  • Posts: 32
    • View Profile
Re: SVN issue
« Reply #7 on: August 02, 2010, 11:13:05 pm »
Hello.

Ah Mattn is the th2000 user over in SVN area. 

Well to answer a few issues... Since insult trip made toward me (i am trained programmer but is newbie with this game program), two years ago regarding on location/structure of a code;  I terminated that post and chose stay away from share/advise with the code (itself) with forum (not matter if new or different).

But this is about the SVN 2.3 build had 400 plus files added since rev 31041 (I updated twice, to 31068 and to 31088 according to SVN logs).

I see in above post, that this merge supposed to be for the properties only (resulting in forced compare first then upload the different file only) not upload everything, apparently somehow is messed up.

R


Offline Duke

  • Administrator
  • PHALANX veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 1037
    • View Profile
Re: SVN issue
« Reply #8 on: August 03, 2010, 11:52:16 pm »
rynait,
please also understand that many/most of us have a rather fast connection and a 'contemporary' or even high end machine. We know that some others don't and keep that in mind, but it's hard to always think of and chose a (more complex) method to keep the use of resources low. Sorry for that :(

A full map compile is a perfect example: for some of us it's merely half an hour, for others it takes all day. Pretty hard to find a good compromise, eh ?

However, if something annoys you and you can come up with a rather easy method to do it better *next* time, we'll gladly listen :)



Offline keybounce

  • Sergeant
  • *****
  • Posts: 330
    • View Profile
Re: SVN issue
« Reply #9 on: August 05, 2010, 07:48:12 am »
A full map compile is a perfect example: for some of us it's merely half an hour, for others it takes all day.
... And for others (1.42 PPC, that's screaming compared to the Z-80's I grew up with) it takes all week. Sigh.

CPU Power does not increase as fast as the workload increases. As CPU's get faster, the systems get slower.

Offline rynait

  • Rookie
  • ***
  • Posts: 32
    • View Profile
Re: SVN issue
« Reply #10 on: August 06, 2010, 12:32:35 am »
Hello,

well what i did, dumped out the project profiles and had it rebuild from working copy. Turns out what i had suspected.  somewhere probably on my end  the merge is corrupted...  (prior to dump, it attempted to merge entire upload making this essentially a version 2.4 rather than 2.3 updates.)

on the issue of compiling the map.   create a new lnk (or alias for linux/mac).  add on the end of compile_maps.bat  "/fast". What this command does, is to reduce the lightmap rendering to fewer instances. thus finishing compile your map faster. However the caveat is fewer 'day/evening' views.

This tradeoff is acceptable to me, because I have slower graphics (GoFX5200) and 1.6 mhz pentium 4 processor (this is a laptop). With the /fast my map is compiled must be more than a hour ... heck I did not time this but usually is finished after my dinner and evening news.

R

Offline Duke

  • Administrator
  • PHALANX veteran
  • *****
  • Posts: 1037
    • View Profile
Re: SVN issue
« Reply #11 on: August 06, 2010, 12:42:36 am »
...  it takes all week. Sigh.
One week sounds a bit too long to me. Last time I did it on my 1.6GHz EeePc, it took (IIRC) three looong evenings *without* the /fast switch keybounce mentioned. There is a wiki article about optimizing the map compile you may want to read ;)