Hi,
On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 11:13 PM, Galen Charlton gmcha...@gmail.com wrote:
If there are no major objections, in a week's time I plan to make the
CVS repo read-only and we'll move forward with Git.
I've now removed write access to the CVS repository, and will disable
CVS entirely once I see
Hi,
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Ed Summers e...@pobox.com wrote:
I would argue for keeping stuff on sf.net ... and leapfrogging svn for
git if we can.
To that end, I've enabled Git in the marcpm SourceForge project and
established a new repository which contains the history from the five
On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 11:13 PM, Galen Charlton gmcha...@gmail.com wrote:
If there are no major objections, in a week's time I plan to make the
CVS repo read-only and we'll move forward with Git.
Hooray, thanks so much Galen! Sounds like a great plan moving forward.
//Ed
Hi,
On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 7:53 PM, Dueber, William dueb...@umich.edu wrote:
Speaking for myself only, of course: Please, for the love of god, move away
from CVS. Moving the code to a more modern VCS and a well-supported host. The
least-painful move might be to SVN on Google Code.
Picking
Hi,
On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 10:57 AM, Ed Summers e...@pobox.com wrote:
I would argue for keeping stuff on sf.net ... and leapfrogging svn for
git if we can.
Both suggestions would be perfectly fine with me. Bryan, for your
reference, TortoiseGit [1] seems to be a well-supported Windows client
