PCSX2 source code development switches to Git

[mirh]

You should update the compilation guides on code.google to say people just have to press the "download ZIP" button now
(or use https://github.com/PCSX2/pcsx2 in tortoise svn)

[tsunami2311]

this why the snv page number looks wierd i gather

[willkuer]

yeah it is a bit more complicated to get the revision numbers. Is there a reason for that random-like revision number?

It is strange to say:

Better use revision '0suiva78zf' - in revision '9238hfwd' refraction forgot something.

[Bositman]

Git doesn't have revision numbers, only random hash codes so that's how it's gonna be.

[tsunami2311]

Git doesn't have revision numbers, only random hash codes so that's how it's gonna be.

seriously? its gona be pain in the ass to keep track of builds

so no more pcsx-rxxxx.exe and pcsx2.exe in the 7z( easy to keep track of what is newer) we gona get pcsx2-*random hash number*.exe and pcsx2.exe argo harder to keep track of what newer when we have multi version.

So much more simpler to keep track revision number that goes up then by date and time( have to open the program) and defiantly easier then a random hash code good thing i dont keep up on build like use.

[nstgc]

While I certainly would prefer the revision numbers, it if help the development team, I'm good with it.

[tsunami2311]

yah i all for what make easier for development i just saying it gona be alot hard to keep track what build is newer this way when have multiple verison downloaded. even developer got to admit have random hash number for revision number would make it harder. cause you wont be able to just look at the exe and right off the bat say this is newer unless work the date and time in to the exe name.

[rama]

We know. This is the one really big complaint about Git and it really sucks.
Weighing in the pros and cons, we still decided it would be worth giving up sensible revision numbers.
(There are workarounds which we're looking in to. For now at least the builds will have the commit date in their name.)

[tsunami2311]

We know. This is the one really big complaint about Git and it really sucks.
Weighing in the pros and cons, we still decided it would be worth giving up sensible revision numbers.
(There are workarounds which we're looking in to. For now at least the builds will have the commit date in their name.)

this great altest we can still keep track of what newer

[nstgc]

yah i all for what make easier for development i just saying it gona be alot hard to keep track what build is newer this way when have multiple verison downloaded. even developer got to admit have random hash number for revision number would make it harder. cause you wont be able to just look at the exe and right off the bat say this is newer unless work the date and time in to the exe name.

My greatest concern isn't about easily figuring out what came before what (though that is on my mind), but rather how all the old SVN releases are will also get renamed. They are refered to elsewhere by their revision, but are now given number that is meaningless to most. This is significant if you are trying to figure out where the build went wrong. For instance I currently want to figure out when Champions of Norrath broke. It use to work, now it doesn't.

Currently I'm still trying to figure out how to build a working version of PCSX2 without a AUR build script so that I can test it.