Re: [Catalyst] [RFC] ditch svn

2007-04-18 Thread Kiki
Jonathan Rockway wrote: I think it's pretty clear that Subversion is a failure for our project. We use topic branches heavily, and that's just not something svn (or really svk) is designed for. I hearby propose that we switch to git. I envision each project in trunk to be a separate

Re: [Catalyst] [RFC] ditch svn

2007-04-18 Thread Chisel Wright
On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 01:21:07AM -0500, Jonathan Rockway wrote: I think it's pretty clear that Subversion is a failure for our project. We It's not clear to me - where's the memo? I don't recall reading anything about the failing of svn/svk on this list - can you either elaborate or point me

Re: [Catalyst] [RFC] ditch svn

2007-04-18 Thread Kieren Diment
On 18/04/07, Chisel Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 01:21:07AM -0500, Jonathan Rockway wrote: I think it's pretty clear that Subversion is a failure for our project. We It's not clear to me - where's the memo? I don't recall reading anything about the failing of

Re: [Catalyst] [RFC] ditch svn

2007-04-18 Thread Christopher H. Laco
Kiki wrote: Jonathan Rockway wrote: I think it's pretty clear that Subversion is a failure for our project. We use topic branches heavily, and that's just not something svn (or really svk) is designed for. I hearby propose that we switch to git. I envision each project in trunk to be

Re: [Catalyst] [RFC] ditch svn

2007-04-18 Thread Bill Moseley
On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 09:14:40PM +1000, Kieren Diment wrote: I think jrockway's original complaint was that the svn/svk model makes merging quite difficult and slows down progress which means that new features are only released slowly. Sounds like a feature. -- Bill Moseley [EMAIL

[Catalyst] Hats off and some Clarifications.

2007-04-18 Thread Dister Kemp
Hi Catalyst Team, Hats off on great work with the framework. I am a total novice and so far the learning has been really rewarding. Thanks I do have a few clarifications at this instance in time. If you can help me out with the same it would help me out in toto. I was going through the

Re: [Catalyst] Hats off and some Clarifications.

2007-04-18 Thread Kieren Diment
On 19/04/07, Dister Kemp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: claims that it does automatic generation of HTML forms and other Database scripts. (to an extent). They call it scaffolding. Is this possible with Catalyst? If so to what extent and how? Catalyst::Example::InstantCRUD provides some

Re: [Catalyst] Hats off and some Clarifications.

2007-04-18 Thread Yuval Kogman
On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 21:04:22 +0530, Dister Kemp wrote: Is this possible with Catalyst? If so to what extent and how? Look into Instacrud, but our general philosphy here at Catalyst land is that scaffolding is rarely useful for anything than ooh shiney or learning how to do it yourself. In

[Catalyst] Re: [Catalyst-dev] [RFC] ditch svn

2007-04-18 Thread Adam Jacob
On Apr 17, 2007, at 11:21 PM, Jonathan Rockway wrote: I think it's pretty clear that Subversion is a failure for our project. We use topic branches heavily, and that's just not something svn (or really svk) is designed for. I hearby propose that we switch to git. I envision each project

Re: [Catalyst] Hats off and some Clarifications.

2007-04-18 Thread Ash Berlin
Please sort out your email client to not use such a small font if you insist on sending html emails. Ta Ash ___ List: Catalyst@lists.rawmode.org Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst Searchable archive: