As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 11 years ago.
Ok, so I've only recently started getting serious about learning how to program, and I've started using Mercurial to manage my projects. I chose Mercurial over SVN because of it's ability to commit changes to a repo while not connected to the internet (these days I find myself in areas without internet access). I'm looking for a piece of software (preferably free, because I'm on a really tight budget :-P) that will allow me to manage a bug database and TODO list for each of my projects without requiring an internet connection. Is there anything out there that'll allow me to do exactly that (maybe more)? I'd prefer something that can work alongside Mercurial, because it'd be a pain to switch source control systems at this point.
Dot Project, best so far in my view.
http://www.dotproject.net/
http://bugseverywhere.org/be/show/HomePage : Bugs Everywhere is a “distributed bugtracker”, designed to complement distributed revision control systems.
Supports Arch, Bazaar, Darcs, GIT, Mercurial
You may be interested in a DVCS called Fossil which has a built-in bug tracker and wiki. I've never used it but it looks like it might meet your needs.
Ok, so it's been a few days and I still haven't found anything that's suitable for my needs. Fossil sounds great, but I miss the Windows shell extensions that TortoiseHg provides (I don't like working on command lines), dotProject is a hosted solution and if I want to run it locally I have to set up WAMP. The BugsEverywhere repo seems to be down (I cant get anything from it using bzr), and Artemis is good but its easier for me to work with something that has a GUI. I found FogBugz, and its a step in the right direction for me, but it's not free (I'm using their 40-day online trial right now. I'm probably going to end up writing one, in Python using Django since I have some experience with it. I know that I shouldn't be re-inventing the wheel, but in this case the wheels available just don't fit right...
Here's a Mercurial extension that tries to provide this - ArtemisExtension.
ticgit, a git based distributed ticketing system, including a command line client and web viewer. it works alongside git. but if you really need distributed source and bugtracking
and you like this application, the cost of switching vc may be acceptable.
CodeBeamer MR looks interesting: http://www.intland.com/products/cb-mr/overview.html
and promises to be free 'forever'...
Related
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 9 years ago.
Is there a tool, similar to MS Access but for Web. Which will allow users to create line-of-business applications and report-applications in a visual environment, but also is backed with a scripting/programming environment?
Note:
In general, I am not fan of MS Access, but in many situation it showed as very efficient way to let the user manipulate data, screens and reports by them self and just help them with the most difficult parts, which required programming.
I have been looking for something similar to MS Access for a while.
I have used access for a long time to build data acquisition tools in a similar way to how lab-view works. I have found the strength of access are the form designer, the query designer, and its ability to work with MSSQL in .adp mode. Also it's ability to use other components from MS office and other com object model based libraries etc. The immediate mode allows for very rapid testing of the vba code. I can not work as productively in visual studio VB.net or any IDE I have tried thus far. However I am not a computer science expert so I hope someone has more knowledge than I do about this.
So far the closest tools I have seen are Alpha 5 v11 and RAD Studio X3 Delphi.
I looked at Limnor Studio VS, MS Light-switch. I tried Python but couldn't find a GUI work as well as in Access. Most of the uses I have are in the area of controlling devices by LAN or GPIB and pulling data off of them for later plotting or other analysis.
I would be very interested to hear of more possibilities.
Maybe you should look at Morfik (http://morfik.com/).
If you know your way around in Access, you'll pick up Morfik in no-time.
You can program your stuff in Java, C#, BASIC and Object Pascal.
It'll be easy to deploy it as a website, and the UI is really slick.
There are many videos online that demonstrate how it works.
You might want to check out m-Power. I wouldn't really compare it with MS Access, but it will let users create line-of-business applications and report-applications in a visual environment.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
In 2011 situation with Hudson and Jenkins was following(IMHO) - Hudson was a little bit stable, but development of Jenkins was a little bit faster.
What is the situation with "Hudson vs Jenkins" now in 2012?
I have used both Hudson and Jenkins. I have been following both change lists.
I still think we made the right choice by moving from Hudson to Jenkins.
The Hudson core developers are now working on Jenkins. Those who are still employed by Oracle are the ones mainly supporting Hudson (as far as I am aware the Apache Maven people are contributing fixes as well).
I've filed a number of bugs back in the Hudson era. I can tell you most of them were resolved in Jenkins. Many months after their resolution, the Hudson people fixed or asked for further input on those particular bugs.
The majority of the plugin developers (almost all, that is) have migrated their plugins to Jenkins and now support Jenkins mainly. In terms of plugins Jenkins is developing much, much faster. There are now some paid plugins provided by Cloudbees.
As far as I am aware, the open source community has moved in it's majority to Jenkins.
Some companies who prefer to have paid support and don't want the hassle of migrating to Jenkins are still using Hudson. Frankly, I don't see why. Jenkins has commercial support too from Cloudbees, which is where Kohsuke Kawaguchi (the creator of Hudson) now works. Cloudbees now even have a free service for hosting GitHub hosted projects in their cloud. They let your OSS projects build for free! :)
Jenkins has improved it's support for the cloud. As mentioned above, Cloudbees also provide this SaaS in the cloud. I am not sure if and to what extent Hudson supports this. I think they're not so advanced at the moment; whatever the case, Hudson doesn't provide a SaaS for the cloud, as far as I am aware.
My opinion is that if you have to pick one, it should be Jenkins.
In terms of stability, for over a year Jenkins has offered a Long-Term Support (LTS) version for people who want to be more assured about the stability and support of the software they're installing.
Every three months or so, a previous release is selected which has been deemed as working well by the community of Jenkins users. This version is then branched, any important fixes (which have been "battle-tested") are backported into this Jenkins version, and then this release gets extra testing by various people and companies. Once it's ready for release, this becomes the new LTS version.
As new high-priority fixes come along, these are backported to the LTS version.
Numerous large users of Jenkins stick to the LTS line of releases, and according to the public Jenkins usage statistics, several thousand deployments are using it.
This should mean the LTS version you are downloading is even more stable than a random version chosen from the usual weekly release line.
Beyond the statistics, the situation regarding Jenkins usage, community size, its level of development, rate of new features added, number of new plugins and mailing list activity in comparison to Hudson doesn't seem to have changed (i.e. Jenkins remains ever-further ahead).
Basically, most of the points made in this previous discussion still apply, though the initial corporate support of Hudson appears to have subsided a little.
I think https://stackoverflow.com/a/5970813/556520 answers a lot of important questions about the hudson vs jenkins issue. The topic explains both sides of the situation with pros and cons for each product.
From personal experience working with CI for years, and recently started developing for Hudson, I would stick with the stable version of hudson just because jenkins is doing more development and support for their cloudbees service, where hudson has moved to the eclipse foundation and is not developing for a service. That's just my $0.02.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
What are the disadvantages/drawbacks of using Xtend?
By asking the development team of Xtend, I got the following answer:
Dear Mr. X,
The major drawback compared to Java development might be that although
Xtend's tooling is much better than the tooling provided by other
languages, it's still not as good as what Eclipse can do for Java
development.
Also note, that Xtend misses some features you might need when
integrating with existing Java projects :
- definition of constructors
- field initialization
- declaration of static methods and fields
The next release will have these features and will also come with an
easy to use integration to run the compiler in Maven or Ant. It's
planned for later this year.
Best Regards, Sven Efftinge
So, to conclude:
(as bjz mentioned) it's quite coupled with an Eclipse environment
critical features are missing
Nevertheless, they seem to be working on them. There is also, a What's next Section
Since version 2.2 - The Eclipse Xtend Language ( released December 2011 ) now ships with support for both the Apache Ant and Apache Maven build tools.
With the additional of this support, a major drawback of not being about to use Xtend in your continuous integration/build process has been resolved.
Whislt official/native IDE support is still limited to the Eclipse IDE, both IntelliJ IDEA from Jetbrains and Netbeans from Oracle offer excellent Maven support which will assist development until IDE specific support is developed.
I haven't tried out Xtend extensively, but I did come across this article last week, and I found very enlightening:
Tight coupling with eclipse tooling
Xtend and Xtext are doubtlessly eclipse technologies through and
through. This is a definite advantage for starting to use these
technologies since they offer nice integration with the eclipse IDE.
As a downside, however, code written in the Xtend language might be
difficult to use with other tools apart from eclipse. On the other
hand, the Java code generated by Xtend is vanilla Java code (apart
from the lightweight Xtend library used in the generated code). This
code, of course, can be used by most other tools. Therefore, I have
chosen above to place the xtend source files not in the main Java
source code folder of the project (src/main/java) but into a separate
folder (src/main/xtext). This enabled to let Java code be generated
into the src/main/java folder. From there, it can be picked up and
used by other tools such as Maven.
In places, insufficient documentation
The documentation available for Xtend is far from extensive. In
comparison, the documentation available for Groovy is extensive
including books and various web sites.
EDIT: Xtend now has a standalone compiler, but they still seem to be pushing the Eclipse integration. Which is completely fine by mean, but it does mean that you won't have as great of an experience in other IDEs. Check out their site to see their future plans.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 9 years ago.
What are CAD applications (Rhino, Autocad) of today written in and how are they organized internally ?
I gave as an example, Autocad and Rhino, although I would love to hear of other examples as well. I'm particularly interested in knowing what is their backend written in (multilanguage ?) and how is it organized, and how do they handle their frontend (GUI) in real time ? Do they use native windows API's or some libraries of their own, since I imagine, as good as may be, the open source solutions on today's market won't cut it. I may be wrong ...
As most of you who have used them know, they handle amongs other things relatively complex rotational operations in realtime (shading is not interesting me). I've been doing some experiments with several packages recently, and for some larger models found that there is considerable difference in speed in, for example, programed rotation (big full ship models) amongst some of them (which I won't name). So I'm wondering about their internals ...
Also, if someone knows of some book on the subject, I'd be interested to hear of it.
3D Mechanical CAD software such as CATIAv5, Pro/Engineer and Solidworks are mostly written in C++, sometimes with a thin COM interface for publishing basic API to customers.
Since these applications are really huge and are being developped by several teams, they rely on large scale C++ design principles, such as Interface/Implementation patterns to insulate the modules from changes.
They are composed of several subsystems such as:
a base framework to provide abstraction from the underlaying OS
a framework for GUI, dialogs and user interaction
a 3D renderer (mostly using OpenGL with some custom scene graph layer)
a geometric kernel, with a tessellation module (so that geometry can be displayed in the renderer)
a parametric modeler build upon the geometric kernel
and a lot specific modelers targeted at different domains (Mechanical, Drafting, Simulation, ...)
As my company is a registered developer for AutoCAD, I know for certain that its written in C++. It exposes a COM interface, as well as a .Net wrapper. Also, it graphics display is componentized and could be possibly replaced.
Way back in its history it used be cross-platform. However its been Windows only for about 10 years and now takes advantage every Windows feature I've seen.
You may be interested in the Open Design Alliance.
AutoLISP is a flavor of lisp that has been used for years to program AutoCAD. Very powerful, not at all friendly.
AutoCAD (and most verticals) have had VBA built-in for about 10 years. Kind of powerful, very friendly. VBA projects are stored in a separate file that is loaded by a mechanism internal to the host program.
The latest version (currently 2010) no longer includes VBA by default. You must install a separate VBA enabler. This is to put us on notice that VBA (VB6 for that matter) will at some point be a thing of the past. The .NET platform is currently the preferred choice. VB.NET, C#.NET, C++ are commonly used. Some have experimented with other .NET languages like F# and IronPython.
The open source project BRL-CAD might interest you.
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I work in an multi-site environment that's currently using Rational ClearCase for source control and Rational ClearQuest for issue tracking (I accept your condolences ahead of time). As a rough estimate I would say this is supporting 200 engineers.
How would you effectively migrate this SCM methodology to a comparative, all Open Source tool suite? Not only would this save literally hundreds of thousands of dollars but I also believe it would improve developer productivity and very little downtime compared to the current system.
Platforms in use include Windows, Linux, UNIX and Solaris.
First, why do you think this would improve developer productivity? I haven't used ClearCase much, and ClearQuest not at all. What about these tools is hindering development?
Once you know what you want, you need to look at various tools. I'm fond of Subversion for SCM, as a general rule, but there are situations it isn't well suited for. I have no strong feelings on specific version tracking systems.
Bear in mind that migration is likely to be a really big project, depending on what you want to bring over from the Rational systems (checking everything out in ClearCase and starting entirely new projects in Subversion will be easy, but any history you want to keep is a lot more work), so there will be no immediate dollar savings. Moreover, switching tools is going to reduce developer productivity for a short time (possibly very short), so this is best seen as a long-term move. Make sure you get the tools you want up front, since you aren't going to want to do migrations very often.
Clearcase is awesome. I use to think like you but then after moving to perforce I realized how great dynamic views are.
I actually asked about this in another question. Basically it is really, really hard and is made much easier if you can live without your revision history.
As for bug tracking my experiences are that open source bug tracking tools are terrible. However using triggers it is usually very easy to integrate them with open source source control. As an example here is how to integrate bugzilla and subversion
Does BasketCase cheer you up any? You might be able to modify, or at least abstract some of the environment you already have...
I've done migration from ClearCase base to Git using Gitcc. Worked like a charm.
As for any tools, ClearCase comes with advantages and drawbacks.
We only use it for lager project with complex merge workflow, where UCM is very useful to visualize in advance the different branches.
Right now, we are evaluating various DVCS open-source solutions, but in my opinion, they cannot handle all kind of projects (like the one with too many files).
Condolences are not required, it seems that if you are working in a large scale development over more than one site, then you have the right tools for the job.
Attempting to make Open Source SCM products work over various sites will be a very interesting challenge - I've not seen something that will work securely, reliably and without a horrendous amount of work (though I'd love to be proved wrong!).
Although your licenses do cost a considerable amount, you also have access to the IBM tech support (who I've found very useful very often). How much would it cost if your open-source environment crashed to it's knees for some reason and your support network consisted of you and your colleagues? 200 developers unable to work effectively? Erk.
I'd be interested to hear why you think it would improve developer productivity. Do they have specific gripes? What do they find is an issue? Could we help you from here work it out with them?
In my humble opinion, Open Source tools are perfect for small to medium sized projects without a relative amount of complexity. I feel what you are attempting to do will be folly.