Kurt Smith wrote: > On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 12:21 PM, Robert > Bradshaw<[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Wed, 26 Aug 2009, Kurt Smith wrote: >> >> >>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 12:18 AM, Robert >>> Bradshaw<[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> On Aug 25, 2009, at 6:37 PM, Kurt Smith wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 6:31 PM, William Stein<[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 12:18 PM, Kurt Smith<[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I think its best that fwrap be its own package, distributed >>>>>>> separately >>>>>>> from Cython. That was the vibe I got from those at the SciPy 2009 >>>>>>> conference and from the recent thread on Fwrap's licensing. The >>>>>>> added >>>>>>> benefit is that fwrap won't weigh Cython down w.r.t. licensing >>>>>>> issues >>>>>>> or be an impediment to Cython's acceptance into the Python std. lib. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Presuming that everyone here agrees with the above (or doesn't >>>>>>> care), >>>>>>> the remaining question is where to host it. Since fwrap is still >>>>>>> closely linked to Cython, I think a natural spot for the mercurial >>>>>>> repo would be on Cython's servers. No strong feelings here -- I'm >>>>>>> just as happy putting it on bitbucket. Fwrap would *not* clutter up >>>>>>> Cython's trac, or Cython's wiki. These would be elsewhere. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> As the own of Cython's servers, I hereby certainly offer you >>>>>> hosting space. >>>>>> >>>>> Thanks! I'm evaluating bitbucket & googlecode to see what they offer >>>>> -- apparently googlecode has mercurial support, so that is a big plus. >>>>> I'll decide soon & let you know. >>>>> >>>> I wouldn't consider it "clutter" to have an fwrap section of the >>>> wiki, nor host another porject on the cython trac server. >>>> >>> Well, this changes things significantly -- thanks for the offer! >>> >>> Since I'd rather work with you folks than some external organization, >>> I'll keep fwrap on Cython's servers, wiki & trac. Thanks for the >>> generosity! >>> >>> I'll start setting things up over the weekend. What's the next step(s)? >>> >> If you point me to your repository, I'll put it up next to ours. I'll also >> set up a trac project for you, and for the wiki I think >> wiki.cython.org/fwrap should be good enough. >> > > I've failed to successfully extract fwrap from hg.cython.org/gsoc-kurt > using 'hg convert'. Do you (or anyone else) have experience > extracting a directory from a hg repo into its own repo? We could > always just copy the directory (gsoc-kurt/Tools/fwrap) and make a new > repo with no history, I guess. > Would it really matter if you loose history? That's what I'd go for, then just keep gsoc-kurt around for a year just in case.
Failing everything else, it should be possible to export every relevant changeset to file and reimport them again into a new repository with a smallish shell script. You likely need to be doing stuff like that anyway in order to submit your code to Google, right? (At least if you want to submit changes to the existing files.) Dag Sverre _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
