PCT (Build automation tool) repository

And if you don't know PCT, you can have a look at the website here

Why not, if it provides as many services as BitBucket or GitHub... And if it stays open for more than 6 months.

I would choose Bitbucket over github any day because:

- I can have both private and public repos for free (everything I build is in a Hg bitbucket repo but I don't want to share everything).

- I use Mercurial (because I think it's more straightforward than Git, but let's not get into religious debates)

- it looks better

- easier team management

just my 2c

Thanks Bronco !

+1 for mercurial, bitbucket (they also give you the option to use git btw)

communities scm... guess it makes as much sense for psc to host that as it does for google, there are other valid options out there so why bother?

I agree with bronco

BitBucket 3 - GitHub 0

[quote user="Mike Fechner"]

Another +1 for Bitbucket here.

+1 for github, I agree that private repositories are a nice feature, of course, but we are talking about an open source project, github is "de facto" standard for open source projects, having lot more exposure (meaning more possible contributors) than bitbucket.

Another +1 for github.

+1 for Bitbucket

www.infoworld.com/.../bitbucket-vs--github--which-project-host-has-the-most-.html

Hi all,

When we released Community 2.0, we introduced a new group named Code Share. At this stage, we are offering our users to reference their open source projects within a catalogue in our Community. Users are asked to provide a limited number of info about their projects as we didn't want to make it too heavy to reference their projects. A short user manual is available here. Users can tag their projects in the way they prefer and, keep in mind that community content is Google indexed.

Taking such an approach, it gives the freedom to our users to have their projects repos hosted on their preferred platform and can use the full power of what these different hosted services offer today. I do not believe we should start building our own hosted services as we will never be able to "compete" neither with Bitbucket nor with GitHub or any other platform available today on the market. It's also a good way for us (Progress) to avoid entering in a debate about what would be the best possible hosted services :-) as some prefer GitHub and others BitBucket.    

This is rather simple/simplistic as an approach but at least it enables users to start referencing in a single place (our Communty) their open source projects and other users could then find these when searching the Community.

We probably haven't promoted it well enough but it's available and waiting for you guys to start adding your good stuff in it and who knows? Maybe in the future we'll add more functionality such as the Community search engine searching GitHub/BitBucket repos and expose results sets within the Community search results.

There is always OEHive ...

I am not using PCT but I'll pipe in anyhow :)

Re: Hg vs Git - I think Git won that war a couple of years ago.  Independently of any technical arguments.

Re: Bitbucket vs GitHub - IMO, the only advantage that Bitbucket has is their free private repos. Actually I know some people that use Bitbucket for their private repos while using GitHub for their public repos.

The big advantage of GitHub is the ecosystem around their social tools.  Also they are here to stay; they are certainly not going anywhere.

On that topic - Gitorious was recently acquired by GitLab.  Same underlying trend as Google Code, GitHub.

Regarding adoption -

Here is the google trends for github vs bitbucket

www.google.com/.../explore

Latest stats from GitHub I can see are 8.8M people w/ 20.5M (public?) repos.

The latest I can see from BitBucket suggests 2.5M; they do not indicate the number of repos (public or private). blog.bitbucket.org/.../bitbucket-2014-in-review

Personal opinion here :) ... - eduard/o

@Jeff, yes it's a possible option too. I recall this is something we quickly discussed at PUG Challenge last year. Would community users be interested?

@Eduardo, thanks for chiming in.


Sent from my iPad=

Let me point out that there are two quite separate problems here, probably more.

One of these is the mechanics of the sharing.  While one system has its possible advantages over another, I would suggest that for most ABL uses, the mechanics are largely irrelevant because all that matters is some way to download the code.  Most projects are going to have one author and maintainer and 99% of the users are going to only be interested in the latest version, so literally a zip file link on a web page is good enough for all those cases.  A very small number of projects may have more than one maintainer and for those some kind of version control, branching, etc. is useful ... but even then, I question how often that needs to be public.  There is always great hope of community involvement, but in practice, not only does the community not contribute much, but even when contributions are made, they need to be filtered through the primary maintainer(s) to insure quality and standards.

The other is finding the project.  In the old days the PSDN source code library had a fair amount of stuff in it, but it was impossible to find unless someone provided a link.  You *might* find it if someone told you about it and gave the name.  If you were just poking around wondering if there was something to address a particular problem, then it was a long shot whether you would find anything before you gave up.  Plus, of course, there was stuff scattered all over the web and that was even less likely to be found without being given a reference.  This was the primary motivation behind OE Hive ... an incompletely realized dream of providing an organized structure where people could find things and which would motivate everyone to put there stuff there so that it could be found.

If PSDN does any less than OE Hive, it is going to add little.

BitBucket 4 - GitHub 3

OEHive 1 : sorry, but no. I *really * appreciate the job you're doing there, but OEHive can't compete with BitBucket or GitHub in terms of integrated features

Roundtable Team Server : never tried it, but does that handle non-progress code ?

Eduardo : I'm sure that GitHub has many more repositories, but how many are dead ones? I've spent quite some time on Git and on Mercurial, and my personal preference still goes for Mercurial. And my preference goes for the Atlassian, in terms of integration with Jira / Bamboo and so on.

> One of these is the mechanics of the sharing.

> <snip>

PCT is one author, one maintainer, but quite a lot of external contributions in terms of code and bug reports. If I had to spend time on a bug tracker, on a wiki, upload directory, I wouldn't have been able to work on PCT. What I'm looking for is something completely integrated and focus on the result.

I don't expect anything from PSDN in terms of development hosting, but more in terms of visibility (and any new project should be present on PSDN).

> The other is finding the project.

> <snip>

And a nice-looking homepage (not saying pretty, just clean) really helps keeping audience on the site, and not switch to the next website. GitHub and BitBucket both provide clean homepages, where you can add interesting information about the work being done on the project (landing on a dead project page is quite a showstopper for me).

As far as development features, I'll bet that just about anything you would want is available in the Drupal library.  But, no one is asking for them.  The current set, which I'll be are more than you realize (look at ProLint) is a compromise based on Drupal 5 and the desire for both projects and groups.  With an injection of effort and enthusiasm, I'm pretty sure we could offer just about anything you needed ... although my point is still that, whatever you might want for your development repository, the public repository needs are very simple.

And, a nice looking home page does you no good if no one can find the home page without a prior reference.  To really penetrate the OE world, one needs to have something that one can find via Google and that, having once found the overall site, one can be guided by interest to discover anything there.

Did you really have a look at Confluence (from Atlassian) and how powerful their wiki-like syntax is ?

> With an injection...

That's exactly what I want to avoid, spending time on tools. And also what PCT users are probably looking for, avoid spending time on uninteresting things.

> And, a nice looking home page does you no good if no one can find the home page without a prior reference

Google Code pages are notoriously well indexed in Google (at least that was the case some time ago)

Gilles

re: Integration with Jira -- Yep, that's a benefit of BitBucket.

re: Hg vs Git  - Some data (with the usual caveats) is here: redmonk.com/.../dvcs-and-git-2014

re: GitHub's dead repos -- I don't know, but "dead" projects are in all hosting sites.  I do know that they have many very active projects (for example, bootstrap has >30K forks), and that in all cases I can think of, companies that have chosen to go to a hosting site have chosen GitHub - this includes Microsoft, Google, Pivotal, Docker, etc,,,

That said, these things are personal.  I'm just reporting on industry trends.

Well, a quick search on google of a repository that is available in github, google code and OEHive (OEUnit) shows github as first result, google code second and OEHive third, so I think github repositories are quite well ranked in google.

Also, searching by tags you can find all repositories easily related to a technology (github.com/search) which gives a quite easy way to navigate all projects for that technology.

Gilles, the injection I was referring to was not from the individual contributor.  It was to the site as a whole which is behind on Drupal updates simply because the founders are tired.

And my point is not about Google ranking.   Google is an adequate search tool when someone tells you that there is a thing called PCT which is the solution to their problem and they need to just find PCT.   That kind of search works no matter where the code is hosted as long as the project has a distinctive name.  But, when someone doesn't have that hint and they just want to go poking around for *something* to help with *some problem*, neither of which are particularly well defined ... or maybe they don't even have a specific problem and just want to browse to see what might be interesting, *that* is when you need the organized knowledge structure to guide them.

and there is always sourceforge.net, nowadays offers both git and mercurial and there is much more than just the scm there... sourceforge.net/.../how-to-migrate-from-google-code-to-sourceforge

+1 to github

[quote user="Thomas Mercer-Hursh"]

The other is finding the project.  In the old days the PSDN source code library had a fair amount of stuff in it, but it was impossible to find unless someone provided a link.  You *might* find it if someone told you about it and gave the name.  If you were just poking around wondering if there was something to address a particular problem, then it was a long shot whether you would find anything before you gave up.

[/quote]

This is what the Code Share area here on Communities is intended to be - a central place for links to various others' code. The only way that Communities can 'host' code (and I use that word lightly) is via uploaded archives.

Jean posted a doc at https://community.progress.com/code_share_group/m/documents/773.aspx with how you can do this.

-- peter

Point being that a code share which is merely an historically ordered list becomes a poor retrieval mechanism after growth.  One needs a knowledge structure to organize the entries.

Defining/maintaining the knowledge structure could be challenging. Content of each Entries being indexed and Entries being tagged by members could be an interresting approach and commonly used these days.  

It is challenging.  At the Hive, we allow people to define their own tags and to place their project within the knowledge structure in multiple places, if appropriate.  If they feel like a new category is required, they contact us.  Periodically (in theory, since I haven't been very good about it recently), I will review what is there  and make corrections if people have sprinkled themselves too liberally around the structure.  So, really, a bit of work to come up with an initial structure in response to an initial set of projects, but then not much maintenance required, assuming that people can put themselves into existing categories.

Here's the result : GitHub is the winner !

After having moved PCT to Bitbucket, I just found out that the integrated wiki system is way too bad to be useful ; opening my internal Confluence website could have been possible, but I'm too lazy to understand how to correctly configure security on Jira/Confluence (security is spread on way too many pages, and I didn't find any simple and useful documentation on how to achieve what I wanted  to do).

Then I tried GitHub, and found the wiki system is much better (although display is not so good on small screens), issues are correctly imported, source is correctly imported.

So the new webpage is for now github.com/.../pct