Hi,

for Tobago I think, we can do it now!

Regards,

Udo

Am 27.07.17 um 13:03 schrieb Bernd Bohmann:
> Ok
> 
> we have some agreement about moving to git.
> Now we should define some time line.
> Any suggestions from the active subprojects?
> 
> Something like 
> 'I would like to move to git after blah blah release'
> 'I would like to move now'
> 'I would like to move in 2 weeks'
> or whatever
> 
> I can support the migration to git.
> 
> Regards 
> 
> Bernd
> 
> 
>  
> 
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Kito Mann <kito.m...@virtua.com
> <mailto:kito.m...@virtua.com>> wrote:
> 
>     Ah, this may be why it's worked for me -- smaller projects with
>     defined release cycles.
> 
>     Anyway, I never meant to imply that git == git flow. We will need
>     some sort of process, though, and the DeltaSpike one seems like a
>     good place to start.
> 
>     ___
> 
>     Kito D. Mann | @kito99 | Author, JSF in Action
>     Web Components, Polymer, JSF, PrimeFaces, Java EE training and
>     consulting
>     Virtua, Inc. | virtua.tech 
>     JSFCentral.com | @jsfcentral | knowesis.io <http://knowesis.io> -
>     fresh Web Components info
>     +1 203-998-0403 <tel:(203)%20998-0403>
> 
>     * See me speak at the ng-conf April 5th-8th: http://bit.ly/2mw7HBj
>     <http://bit.ly/2kr0fWI>
>     * Listen to the Enterprise Java Newscast: http://enterprisejavanews.com
> 
> 
>     On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 8:02 AM, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de
>     <mailto:strub...@yahoo.de>> wrote:
> 
>         gitflow is pure pita ;)
>         It basically only works for companies where you have a single
>         manager who decides what goes in and what not.
> 
>         But GIT != gitflow. gitflow has nothing to do with the GIT scm
>         itself, but is just a fancy name for a development process with
>         an explicit build-branch and a build-master.
> 
>         +0 on moving to GIT.
>         SVN works good enough imo, but GIT ofc also would work.
> 
>         LIeGrue,
>         strub
> 
>         > Am 19.04.2017 um 12:57 schrieb Kito Mann <kito.m...@virtua.com
>         <mailto:kito.m...@virtua.com>>:
>         >
>         > +1
>         >
>         > Wha's wrong with GitFlow?
>         >
>         > ___
>         >
>         > Kito D. Mann | @kito99 | Author, JSF in Action
>         > Web Components, Polymer, JSF, PrimeFaces, Java EE training and
>         consulting
>         > Virtua, Inc. | virtua.tech
>         > JSFCentral.com | @jsfcentral | knowesis.io
>         <http://knowesis.io> - fresh Web Components info
>         > +1 203-998-0403 <tel:%2B1%20203-998-0403>
>         >
>         > * See me speak at the ng-conf April 5th-8th: http://bit.ly/2mw7HBj
>         > * Listen to the Enterprise Java Newscast:
>         http://enterprisejavanews.com
>         >
>         >
>         > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 4:29 AM, Bernd Bohmann
>         <bernd.bohm...@googlemail.com
>         <mailto:bernd.bohm...@googlemail.com>> wrote:
>         > Hello
>         >
>         > I think the changes will be not so complicated. The deltaspike
>         pom looks nice :-)
>         > If someone talks about git-flow process i'm out.
>         >
>         > Regards
>         >
>         > Bernd
>         >
>         > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 12:28 AM, Leonardo Uribe
>         <lu4...@gmail.com <mailto:lu4...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>         > +1
>         >
>         > Change the release process is a pain, but I agree there are
>         some benefits moving to git.
>         >
>         > But when I see here:
>         >
>         > https://github.com/apache/myfaces
>         <https://github.com/apache/myfaces>
>         >
>         > It says:
>         >
>         > mirrored from git://git.apache.org/myfaces.git
>         <http://git.apache.org/myfaces.git>
>         >
>         > But I have never checked where that file is or how to change it.
>         >
>         > Looking in deltaspike, the svn repo only has the site (for the
>         CMS) and the source code lives on git. If that so, we still need
>         the svn, so I agree it is a good idea to move only some
>         subprojects to git.
>         >
>         > regards,
>         >
>         > Leonardo Uribe
>         >
>         >
>         >       Virus-free. www.avast.com <http://www.avast.com>
>         >
>         > 2017-04-17 11:40 GMT-05:00 Grant Smith <work.gr...@gmail.com
>         <mailto:work.gr...@gmail.com>>:
>         > +1
>         >
>         > Couldn't agree more.
>         >
>         > Grant Smith - V.P. Information Technology
>         > Marathon Computer Systems, LLC.
>         >
>         > On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 2:39 AM, Bernd Bohmann
>         <bernd.bohm...@atanion.com <mailto:bernd.bohm...@atanion.com>>
>         wrote:
>         > From my side a big
>         >
>         > +1
>         >
>         > I'm still happy with subversion but for others the
>         collaboration is easier and the project visibility a little bit
>         better.
>         >
>         > Regards
>         >
>         > Bernd
>         >
>         > Am 13.04.2017 09:41 schrieb "Thomas Andraschko"
>         <andraschko.tho...@gmail.com <mailto:andraschko.tho...@gmail.com>>:
>         > +0
>         > I usually just work on MF core and there it doesn't make much
>         difference.
>         >
>         > 2017-04-13 8:57 GMT+02:00 Dennis Kieselhorst <m...@dekies.de
>         <mailto:m...@dekies.de>>:
>         > Hi,
>         >
>         > have you ever thought of migrating to Git? I see more and more
>         Apache
>         > projects moving. In the past SVN or Git didn't make any
>         difference to me
>         > but now I'm thinking that as an Open Source project you need to be
>         > present on GitHub to get Pull Requests from the community.
>         It's much
>         > more fun contributing there than attaching patches to JIRA issues.
>         >
>         > We could start with Trinidad and Tobago to avoid conflicts
>         with the 2.3
>         > release.
>         >
>         > Cheers
>         > Dennis
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         >
> 
> 
> 

Reply via email to