I have removed the wireshark directory, and created a new repo on github for
hosting it separately:
https://github.com/FreeRDP/Wireshark
On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 8:37 PM, Marc-André Moreau <
marcandre.mor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 8:18 PM, Mads Kiilerich <m...@kiilerich.com>wrote:
>
>> Marc-André Moreau wrote, On 03/09/2011 04:54 PM:
>>
>>
>>> doc/patches.txt
>>>
>>>
>>> We could move that to the wiki
>>>
>>
>> What relevance do any of the content in that file have to us?
>>
>
> Ok, I just removed it :P
>
>>
>> wireshark/packet-rdp.c
>>> wireshark/packet-rdp.h
>>> wireshark/readme.txt
>>>
>>>
>>> The wireshark dissector should not be included in "make dist" but it is
>>> not outdated or broken.
>>>
>>
>> This is your patches for another project, right? Shouldn't it be sent
>> upstream and included in wireshark so it would be easier for everybody to
>> use? It might improve another tool so it is more usable for FreeRDP, but I
>> think it deserves a future independent of FreeRDP.
>>
>
> I started making a wireshark dissector for RDP, but I don't think it is
> complete enough to be submitted to wireshark. Since I'm not a wireshark
> developer, it is good to have it on our own version control for day-to-day
> development. You are right, it should be developed independently of FreeRDP,
> even if it is useful. Once we switch to github, I'll make a git repo just
> for that project and remove the wireshark directory from the FreeRDP repo. I
> wouldn't be surprised if a student ends up working on it as part of google
> summer of code, writing a wireshark dissector is fun.
>
>>
>> I have been thinking about it for a while, what would you guys think of
>>> switching from the sourceforge.net <http://sourceforge.net> git
>>> repository to gitorious.org <http://gitorious.org>? It would make things
>>> easier for maintaining two git repositories under the same project. I'm not
>>> even sure if sourceforge.net <http://sourceforge.net> allows that.
>>>
>>
>> I'm proud to have started such a long thread about git under this headline
>> ;-)
>>
>
> Not too fast :P This is a limitation of sourceforge.net, not git :D We
> realized how each sourceforge.net service one after the other didn't
> really fit our needs in the end, so that we ended up replacing them. Once we
> move to github, we'll only have the mailing list and the file distribution
> service left on sourceforge.net.
>
>>
>> We have now seen so many opinions on how the project should be hosted.
>> Please let me share my opinion too.
>>
>> I think we should switch to Mercurial. It is mostly a matter of (good ;-)
>> ) taste, but I do for example think it is fair to say that:
>> * it is simpler to use than git
>> * it puts more emphasis on keeping a clean history and using the history
>> as a resource
>> * bitbucket.org
>
>
> Hehe, let's just say that hum... we stick to git? I know you love
> mercurial, but I don't see a reason good enough to justify moving to
> mercurial. git is doing its job and people are getting used to it now, so
> adding a new learning curve for mercurial might be not that useful in the
> end if both have a lot of similarities. If poor git hosting on
> sourceforge.net could have given you arguments against it, it won't be the
> case any more with github hosting that does a much better job :P
>
>
>>
>> /Mads
>>
>>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Colocation vs. Managed Hosting
A question and answer guide to determining the best fit
for your organization - today and in the future.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/internap-sfd2d
_______________________________________________
Freerdp-devel mailing list
Freerdp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freerdp-devel
