Sounds like a familiar workflow. I find I do that with svn far more often that I like! ;-)
On Mar 14, 2013, at 4:15 PM, christofer.d...@c-ware.de wrote: > Just as a suggestion ... why not clone the GIT version as soon as it's > finished. > Then delete the ".git" or ".svn" stuff from the copy you are currently > working on. > Then simply copy all the stuff from the SCM-less copy containing your changes > into your clean clone. > Git should detect unchanged, modified and new files ... only thing is that it > won't detect moved or deleted files. > > After that ... commit ... push ... all's good and no kittens get's killed :-) > > Think this should work without the need to actually patch anything at all > (Assuming you were the only one working on the Falcon code ... if there were > more people working on this, this would be a problem though). > > Chris > > ________________________________________ > Von: Erik de Bruin [e...@ixsoftware.nl] > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 13. März 2013 20:45 > An: dev@flex.apache.org > Betreff: Re: Git Migration Reset > >> Ah, so you made changes to the supposedly read-only git repo in the >> meantime. Why would you do something like that? While at the same time >> you were asking for a do over. Does not compute. What did you expect? > > There was nothing "read-only" about my local copy. The understanding > at the time was that write enableing of the the remote copy (branch?) > would be a matter of hours, subject only to a check by the PMC. Before > starting work, I did check the Falcon git repo, and it looked good. It > thing it was not unreasonable for me to expect the 'write' switch to > be throw with the same expediency with which INFRA moved at the start > of this episode. > > On the point of the "do over": I don't recall asking for such a thing. > I understand no that the confusion might have come from the [DISCUSS] > thread I started - note: this was AFTER INFRA took their unilateral > action by removing the git repos and re-enabling SVN - was about > postponing the migration until INFRA had taken their 'git' support out > of beta and was ready to fully support it, presumably months if not > years in the future. That thread is not VOTE or LAZY but DISCUSS. I > specifically chose that subject so no action would be taken until a > discussion had taken place. > >> Theoretically, that would work. But given that you are not too familiar >> with Git, it would be a risky proposition. It is up to you. > > Well, "up to me" is not really the case, as I explained, but I > understand it's "out of your hands." I'll make a full backup of the > actual source files, just to make sure no code is lost when trying to > manage the move to git. > > Now, before this gets out of hand, let me re-iterate: by now - by way > of a healthy serving of tutorials and some needed distraction on > /r/aww - I nearly understand the basics of git. I accept the project > is moving to git, unless a new consensus on the DISCUSS thread leads > to a new VOTE :-) I am doing my best to have my code ready for the > migration and by sharing my experiences and frustrations with the list > I try to smooth the way for others. > > TL;DR: confusion all over the place, but really there's nothing to see > here, we're moving forward to a 'git' future. > > EdB > > > >> Thanks, >> Om >> >> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Ix Multimedia Software >>> >>> Jan Luykenstraat 27 >>> 3521 VB Utrecht >>> >>> T. 06-51952295 >>> I. www.ixsoftware.nl >>> > > > > -- > Ix Multimedia Software > > Jan Luykenstraat 27 > 3521 VB Utrecht > > T. 06-51952295 > I. www.ixsoftware.nl
