* Ondrej Certik ond...@certik.cz [2008-12-21 00:08:18 +0100]:
As to mercurial Tristan, I don't know if you actually ever used
hg-buildpackage, but it is written in Haskell (!) and see my blog post
here:
I've used it; being written in Haskell isn't something I consider a
problem. It works
[Piotr Ożarowski, 2008-12-23 13:37]
unfortunately I use Git only outside Debian, so I don't know about
issues git-buildpackage might have. I know it doesn't have
mergeWithUpstream but it's written in Python, so we can implement this.
The problem is (FWIK) that it's better to use Git with
On Fri, Dec 26, 2008 at 12:54 AM, Piotr Ożarowski pi...@debian.org wrote:
[Piotr Ożarowski, 2008-12-23 13:37]
unfortunately I use Git only outside Debian, so I don't know about
issues git-buildpackage might have. I know it doesn't have
mergeWithUpstream but it's written in Python, so we can
On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 15:54, Ondrej Certik ond...@certik.cz wrote:
...
Last reply on this thread, just to recap what Ondrej and me discussed
on irc this evening.
I didn't realize I ain't made clear what's my network situation: I'm
still at 56k, so many of the think you broadband users consider
Ondrej Certik wrote:
Agree. We talked with Sandro on IRC, the problem is in a bad internet
connection --- it takes ~40min to download 10MB -- then of course
every MB matters. For me it takes just couple seconds, so it doesn't
really matter if I am downloading tarball+debian dir separately, or
On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 10:35 PM, Sandro Tosi mo...@debian.org wrote:
On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 00:48, Ondrej Certik ond...@certik.cz wrote:
thanks for the points, I reacted to some.
so please accept my reply :)
Absolutely. :)
have you ever tried git-svn to work over your packages actually in
Le mercredi 24 décembre 2008 à 00:48 +0100, Ondrej Certik a écrit :
Imho if we are going to only version the debian dir, then I also don't
see such a strong argument for git (or other distributed vcs). Since
it will still need to fiddle with upstream tarball and also with
debian/patches +
Josselin Mouette j...@debian.org writes:
TTBOMK no other VCS is as smooth to operate as subversion *for
Debian packages*. Only svn-buildpackage can handle correctly the
versioning of the debian/ directory alone.
What mis-handlings of a separate ‘debian/’ directory do you know of in
the other
On Wed, Dec 24, 2008, Josselin Mouette wrote:
Precisely. TTBOMK no other VCS is as smooth to operate as subversion
*for Debian packages*. Only svn-buildpackage can handle correctly the
versioning of the debian/ directory alone.
bzr bd works fine in this mode; did you try it out?
--
Loïc
On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 00:48, Ondrej Certik ond...@certik.cz wrote:
thanks for the points, I reacted to some.
so please accept my reply :)
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Sandro Tosi mo...@debian.org wrote:
P.S. bzed, POX, isn't it time to move our packaging to git?
I'm none of them, but
Cyril Brulebois wrote:
Tristan Seligmann mithra...@mithrandi.net (20/12/2008):
My personal preference ordering would probably be:
hg, bzr, svn, git
git, FD, *
+1 :)
http://whygitisbetterthanx.com
--
Bernd Zeimetz Debian GNU/Linux Developer
GPG
Btw, Emilio did a list of the most active DPMT users, here it is. Some
people like pox and piotr are actually the same.
And the same list for PAPT:
emi...@saturno:~/deb/python-apps$ svn log | egrep ^r[0-9]+ | cut
-f2 -d'|' | sed 's/-guest//' | sort | uniq -c | sort -n -r
401 nijel
Matthias Klose wrote:
I only trust my own comparsion without any date and version numbers.
And honestly I don't care about a checkin of the usual 2-5 files
taking half a second longer. What annoys me most with git is the
steep learning curve and the non-intuitive UI, therefore I do prefer
I'd prefer:
hg, git, bzr, svn, *
but looks like the trend goes to git, which is a good option IMHO.
Merry Christmas,
Eike
pgpHKNQOnhCVA.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 2:14 PM, Bernd Zeimetz be...@bzed.de wrote:
Matthias Klose wrote:
I only trust my own comparsion without any date and version numbers.
And honestly I don't care about a checkin of the usual 2-5 files
taking half a second longer. What annoys me most with git is the
Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
Cyril Brulebois wrote:
Tristan Seligmann mithra...@mithrandi.net (20/12/2008):
My personal preference ordering would probably be:
hg, bzr, svn, git
git, FD, *
+1 :)
http://whygitisbetterthanx.com
I don't know git, but I want to learn about it.. so It can be a
On Tue, 23 Dec 2008 15:08:03 +0100 Loïc Minier l...@dooz.org wrote:
On Mon, Dec 08, 2008, Ondrej Certik wrote:
P.S. bzed, POX, isn't it time to move our packaging to git? So that I
can just commit such patches in a branch and also so that we don't
have to mess with the orig.tar.gz, svn-uscan
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 02:14:25PM +0100, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
Matthias Klose wrote:
I only trust my own comparsion without any date and version numbers.
And honestly I don't care about a checkin of the usual 2-5 files
taking half a second longer. What annoys me most with git is the
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008, Scott Kitterman wrote:
I'll argue we want something different. We want VCS that will
maximize participation. That means both keeping top contributors
happpy and keeping it accessible to newcomers.
I don't think hg, bzr, or git obviously qualify as accesible. My
Hi Sandro,
thanks for the points, I reacted to some.
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Sandro Tosi mo...@debian.org wrote:
P.S. bzed, POX, isn't it time to move our packaging to git?
I'm none of them, but I'll speak anyway :) Buxy almost did my point,
I'd like to express me a bit.
To do a
Tristan Seligmann mithra...@mithrandi.net (20/12/2008):
My personal preference ordering would probably be:
hg, bzr, svn, git
git, FD, *
devotee to the rescue.
Mraw,
KiBi.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org writes:
Tristan Seligmann mithra...@mithrandi.net (20/12/2008):
My personal preference ordering would probably be:
hg, bzr, svn, git
git, FD, *
bzr, git, hg, FD, svn
--
\ “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his |
`\
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 09:04:33AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org writes:
Tristan Seligmann mithra...@mithrandi.net (20/12/2008):
My personal preference ordering would probably be:
hg, bzr, svn, git
git, bzr, svn
I read some git stuff today and think
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 9:07 PM, Monty Taylor mo...@inaugust.com wrote:
/me whinges that switching to bzr for packaging in general would be a
much nicer thing overall, since then ubuntu downstream is pretty well
bzr...
(note: I use bzr for all of my other projects, so I have a vested
Steve Langasek wrote:
(that's just my subjective opinion, please don't start a flame war now)
It's a rather strongly worded opinion; if you want to avoid flame wars, you
might find it helpful to bring specific criticisms to the table instead of
just declaring a solution ugly. :)
++
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 7:49 PM, Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org wrote:
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 06:43:19PM +0100, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
Monty Taylor wrote:
/me whinges that switching to bzr for packaging in general would be a
much nicer thing overall, since then ubuntu downstream is pretty
/me whinges that switching to bzr for packaging in general would be a
much nicer thing overall, since then ubuntu downstream is pretty well
bzr...
(note: I use bzr for all of my other projects, so I have a vested interest)
However... _anything_ is an improvement over svn.
Monty
Piotr Ożarowski
Ondrej Certik wrote:
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 9:07 PM, Monty Taylor mo...@inaugust.com wrote:
/me whinges that switching to bzr for packaging in general would be a
much nicer thing overall, since then ubuntu downstream is pretty well
bzr...
(note: I use bzr for all of my other projects, so I
On Mon, Dec 08, 2008 at 06:55:10PM +0100, Ondrej Certik wrote:
So if anyone (Kumar?) have time to work on this, it'd be awesome. For
others, if you just need the package, apply the patch and it will
build.
Since you pulled me in, I'll have a look some time next week, unless
someone else does
29 matches
Mail list logo
