SourceForge Allura - First Impressions

Now that SourceForge are promoting their new Allura forge and are encouraging projects to move to it, I thought it was time to dip my toe in the water.

I have a tiny project called CompFileDate (a file date comparison utility) that I keep on SourceForge mainly as a test-bed. I thought I'd migrate that to try out the new platform before taking the plunge and migrating the much larger CodeSnip project.

Here are my first impressions.

The new interface is very clean and looks promising. But it is quite inconsistent and the menus change between a simple clear menu bar on some pages to a kind of toolbar on other pages. Here's part of the menu as displayed when viewing the summary page.

And now here's what it looks like when the Wiki item is clicked:

Not only has the style changed but, in the first menu you get to the download files page from the "Files" item. In the second menu you get there from "Downloads".

It confused the hell out of me at the start, and still catches me out now.

The repo browser, at first sight, it hugely improved. This:

 

instead of this:

And navigating is easier and more intuitive. Now, if you click on a file you see the file (yeh!), whereas before clicking on a file gave you a list of revisions and you had to click a view link to see the file itself. Conversely, if you clicked a revision number next to a file you saw the file! Love to know who thought of that one. So the new interface is a huge improvement in that respect.

The wiki is a massive improvement on the old version. It seems much quicker and uses the simple Markdown for markup. I might actually start using it now.

I haven't got issue tracking or news activated for CompFileDate, so I can't say anything about that.

There are a couple of problems with speed:

  1. The system seems slow to update: as I write on 16th September, the summary page is showing the last update as the 14th where in fact I updated only about an hour ago. And it keeps getting revision numbers out of sync.
  2. The whole system is s-l-o-w. But then again I've always found the main problem with SourceForge is its speed: I just hoped it would improve.

The file manager is pretty much unchanged from the old interface, and all the better for that. Nice.

One of the other issues that may be more or less of a problem for you is that the URLs used to checkout from the Subversion repo have changed. That's not too much of a problem for CompFileDate but it will mean quite a few documentation tweaks for CodeSnip.

I'm really hoping many of my gripes are down to teething problems, because in general I like Allura. Or rather, I think I'm going to like it.

Will I be migrating CodeSnip? Think I'll wait a while.

By the way, if you use CompFileDate, the new checkout URLs are given on the project's SourceForge Code page.

Comments

Post a Comment

Comments are very welcome, but please don't comment here if:

1) You have a query about, or a bug report for, one of my programs or libraries. Most of my posts contain a link to the relevant repository where there will be an issue tracker you can use.

2) You have a query about any 3rd party programs I feature, please address them to the program's developer(s) - there will be a link in the post.

3) You're one of the tiny, tiny minority who are aggressive or abusive - in the bin you go!

Thanks

Popular posts from this blog

New String Property Editor Planned For RAD Studio 12 Yukon 🤞

Image
This blog post is based on a pre-release version of the RAD Studio software and it has been written with specific permission by Embarcadero. No feature is committed until the product GA release. It seems I'm getting very excited about multi-line strings of late. My previous post was about multi-line string literals for Delphi  and this time I'm talking about the new multi-line string property editor being slated for the RAD Studio 12 IDE. For more years than I care to remember, I've been frustrated by the inability to enter multi-line strings in the Delphi IDE object inspector. That meant having to resort to code to initialise some multi-line labels. So frustrated was I that I wrote a little property editor of my own ( stringpe ), way back in 2004. It's still around and on GitHub. Here's what it (sometimes) looks like: Yeah, I know this is Vista - I used an old screenshot Sometimes? Well it looked like that until it got installed on DPI aware Delphis, and then it sh
Read more

Multi-line String Literals Planned For Delphi 12 Yukon🤞

This blog post is based on a pre-release version of the RAD Studio software and it has been written with specific permission by Embarcadero. No feature is committed until the product GA release. The upcoming new release of RAD Studio 12 Yukon is a major update that's got a new Delphi language features that I've been wanting for years, or perhaps even decades since I first discovered heredocs in PHP. Yep, we're going to get multi-line string literals. This excites me just as much as the earlier introduction of inline var statements, which was a lot! I write a lot of multiline string constants in my code like this: const   S0 = ' Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.' +         sLineBreak  +        '   Vestibulum eleifend elit id dapibus pulvinar.' +        sLineBreak +        'Suspendisse tincidunt, diam vel dapibus aliquam.'; Miss out one of the closing quotes or + signs and bang, compile failure. Annoying. But now we have multi-l
Read more

Call JavaScript in a TWebBrowser and get a result back

Calling a JavaScript function in a TWebBrowser is easy, but getting a return value from it is hard. I've been struggling for ages to find an answer to this, and lots of users have asked. My article " How to call JavaScript functions in a TWebBrowser from Delphi " goes into details. Christian Sciberras suggested a solution that depended on modifying the HTML source to include a hidden input field and modifying the function stores its result in the field. I've wanted a tidier solution that didn't involve changing either the HTML code or the JavaScript function, because we can't always do that. I've now got a solution based on Christian's: Create a hidden input field in the current document with a unique id. Wrap the required function call in JavaScript that calls the function and stores its return value in the input field. Read the value from the input field and return it. It's a bit of a dirty hack, and it only works if the function&#
Read more