Mark, I have checked out the log4net SVN test repository from http://svn.apache.org/repos/test/logging/log4net and everything seems to be fine. All the files are there, the projects build, and the tests pass.
>From log4net's point of view I am happy for the SVN migration to take place as in the test. The cvs2svn converter really does a nice job of grouping together related cvs checkins into single svn transactions. Hopefully we can get the migration done as quickly as possible. Cheers, Nicko > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Womack [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 10 September 2005 01:54 > To: Logging General; Henri Yandell > Subject: Re: Logging-Log4j -> SVN > > I have not gotten any indication that folks are going to be > available tomorrow besides Henri and myself. I don't think > we should approve the migration until someone from each > subproject reviews and approves. > > So, please spend some time this weekend reviewing the initial > conversion that Henri has performed and post feedback here. > We will finalize the migration before the end of next week. > > [Henri, sorry if this seems to be taking longer than > expected. We'll get it wrapped up quickly though] > > thanks, > -Mark > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mark Womack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Logging General" <[email protected]>; "Henri Yandell" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Friday, September 09, 2005 8:08 AM > Subject: Re: Logging-Log4j -> SVN > > > > Should we set up some kind of Yahoo! IM Conference or an > IRC chat channel > > for tomorrow? I can set up a Yahoo! conference, but I > don't know if > > everyone has a yahoo id. I don't know how to set up an irc > channel. Who > > is going to be around? > > > > -Mark > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Mark Womack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "Henri Yandell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Cc: "Logging General" <[email protected]> > > Sent: Sunday, September 04, 2005 4:01 PM > > Subject: Re: Logging-Log4j -> SVN > > > > > >> Hi Henri, > >> > >> We are planning to migrate all of the Logging Services > projects to svn. > >> We'd like to target the timeframe of 9/10 for the > project-wide migration. > >> Is that timeframe ok with you? What are the things we > need to decide as > >> part of the migration? > >> > >> One thing I was wondering in regards to the sandbox, > should we have a > >> sandbox per project or maybe a top level sandbox that more > people can > >> play in . > >> > >> thanks, > >> -Mark > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "Henri Yandell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> To: "Mark Womack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> Cc: "Shapira, Yoav" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2005 5:59 PM > >> Subject: Re: Logging-Log4j -> SVN > >> > >> > >>> > >>> Pinging again :) > >>> > >>> CVS-wise you've got: > >>> > >>> logging-chainsaw/ > >>> logging-log4cxx/ > >>> logging-log4j/ > >>> logging-log4j-attic/ > >>> logging-log4j-sandbox/ > >>> logging-log4net/ > >>> logging-log4php/ > >>> logging-site/ > >>> > >>> Are they all still active? > >>> > >>> The obvious mapping to SVN would be: > >>> > >>> logging/ > >>> chainsaw/ > >>> trunk/ branches/ tags/ > >>> log4cxx/ > >>> trunk/ branches/ tags/ > >>> log4j/ > >>> attic/ > >>> sandbox/ > >>> trunk/ branches/ tags/ > >>> proper/ > >>> trunk/ branches/ tags/ > >>> log4net/ > >>> trunk/ branches/ tags/ > >>> log4php/ > >>> trunk/ branches/ tags/ > >>> site/ > >>> > >>> Only using 'proper' as the alternative to sandbox as that's what > >>> commons/taglibs uses. > >>> > >>> Hen > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > >
