On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Alexey Shvetsov wrote:
> Since most of us want "clean cut" solution so i will close bug #333699 as
> WONTFIX
Along these lines, I'm looking at 333531 (the git migration tracker),
and it seems like there isn't actually much to do:
333685 - Seems like no action, a
Ok.
Since most of us want "clean cut" solution so i will close bug #333699
as WONTFIX
--
Best Regards,
Alexey 'Alexxy' Shvetsov
Petersburg Nuclear Physics Institute, NRC Kurchatov Institute,
Gatchina, Russia
Department of Molecular and Radiation Biophysics
Gentoo Team Ru
Gentoo Linux Dev
mail
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Kent Fredric wrote:
> On 25 May 2012 18:12, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>>
>> Actually, Alec's question is not so far-fetched. The Gentoo Social
>> Contract says that Gentoo will never depend upon a piece of software
>> unless it is open source.
>>
>
> Though in the cas
On 25 May 2012 18:12, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>
> Actually, Alec's question is not so far-fetched. The Gentoo Social
> Contract says that Gentoo will never depend upon a piece of software
> unless it is open source.
>
Though in the case of github, gentoo is not "depending upon it".
Github could die
> On Fri, 25 May 2012, Kent Fredric wrote:
> On 25 May 2012 13:21, Alec Warner wrote:
>>
>> So I'm a bit confused. Is GitHub open source?
> Your confusion begets more confusion:
> Whether or not Github is open-source seems orthogonal to whether or
> not we use it, as github is a website, a
On 25 May 2012 13:21, Alec Warner wrote:
>
> So I'm a bit confused. Is GitHub open source?
>
Your confusion begets more confusion:
Whether or not Github is open-source seems orthogonal to whether or
not we use it, as github is a website, a service, and there are a few
such websites, of which, git
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 5:32 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Ralph Sennhauser wrote:
>> Can we keep the master on Gentoo hardware please.
>>
>> Also, there still should be a bug at b.g.o and git format-patch works
>> just fine for that. Maybe it's only github now but h
> On 24/05/12 02:37 PM, Dan Douglas wrote:
> > On Thursday, May 24, 2012 01:52:32 PM Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> >
> > Of course it's read only - just like all other public
> > repositories. You don't want to accept improvments? I don't
> > understand this.
>
> I have no problem with accepting imp
Am Mittwoch, 23. Mai 2012, 18:33:41 schrieb Michał Górny:
> On Wed, 23 May 2012 14:42:37 +0200
>
> Michael Weber wrote:
> > *if you still read this* *wow*
> >
> > Please discuss my arguments and come to the conclusions to
> > RESO/WONT-FIX "testing git-cvsserver", make a "clean cut" and remove
> >
On Thursday, May 24, 2012 01:52:32 PM Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> On 24/05/12 01:13 PM, Kent Fredric wrote:
> > On 25 May 2012 03:02, Ralph Sennhauser wrote:
> >> On Thu, 24 May 2012 16:40:02 +0200 Michał Górny
> >>
> >> wrote:
> >>> d) Talk with github folks to add our repo as 'mirror'.
> >>
> >>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 05/24/2012 06:52 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> On 24/05/12 01:13 PM, Kent Fredric wrote:
>> On 25 May 2012 03:02, Ralph Sennhauser wrote:
>>> On Thu, 24 May 2012 16:40:02 +0200 Michał Górny
>>> wrote:
>>>
d) Talk with github folks to add
>
>
> ...is this something we (as the developer base) WANT non-dev's to be
> able to do?? I would expect we'd want the tree to still be treated as
> read-only-not-modifyable by the rest of the gentoo/linux community,
> otherwise we're going to have a rather large mess on our hands
> (multiple fork
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 24 May 2012 13:52:32 -0400
Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> > When the user has their tree up to how they want it, they can
> > either send a pull request to another gentoo dev who also has a
> > fork on github, or send a link to the commit via some
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 24/05/12 01:13 PM, Kent Fredric wrote:
> On 25 May 2012 03:02, Ralph Sennhauser wrote:
>> On Thu, 24 May 2012 16:40:02 +0200 Michał Górny
>> wrote:
>>
>>> d) Talk with github folks to add our repo as 'mirror'.
>>
>> Can we keep the master on G
On 25 May 2012 03:02, Ralph Sennhauser wrote:
> On Thu, 24 May 2012 16:40:02 +0200
> Michał Górny wrote:
>
>> d) Talk with github folks to add our repo as 'mirror'.
>
> Can we keep the master on Gentoo hardware please.
Definitely. But having a mirror on github will increase forkability,
and wil
On 24/05/2012 03:19, Mark Wright wrote:
> Michael Weber writes:
>> "Clean cut" turns of cvs access on a given and announced timestamp,
>> rsync-generation/updates is suspended (no input -> no changes), some
>> magic scripts prepare the git repo (according to [3], some hours
>> duration) and we all
On Thu, 24 May 2012 17:02:24 +0200
Ralph Sennhauser wrote:
> On Thu, 24 May 2012 16:40:02 +0200
> Michał Górny wrote:
>
> > d) Talk with github folks to add our repo as 'mirror'.
>
> Can we keep the master on Gentoo hardware please.
Yes, that's the intent. I'm just saying that github seems to
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Ralph Sennhauser wrote:
> Can we keep the master on Gentoo hardware please.
>
> Also, there still should be a bug at b.g.o and git format-patch works
> just fine for that. Maybe it's only github now but how many places is a
> developer supposed to monitor?
I'm ac
On Thu, 24 May 2012 16:40:02 +0200
Michał Górny wrote:
> d) Talk with github folks to add our repo as 'mirror'.
Can we keep the master on Gentoo hardware please.
Also, there still should be a bug at b.g.o and git format-patch works
just fine for that. Maybe it's only github now but how many pla
On Thu, 24 May 2012 22:17:20 +1200
Kent Fredric wrote:
> On 24 May 2012 09:48, Michael Weber wrote:
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA256
> >
> > On 05/23/2012 11:14 PM, Dan Douglas wrote:
> >> On Wednesday, May 23, 2012 04:47:04 PM Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> >>> 2. rsync genera
On 24 May 2012 09:48, Michael Weber wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On 05/23/2012 11:14 PM, Dan Douglas wrote:
>> On Wednesday, May 23, 2012 04:47:04 PM Robin H. Johnson wrote:
>>> 2. rsync generation is NOT going away. Users will still be using
>>> it.
>
> First, I'
Kent Fredric писал 2012-05-24 13:02:
On 24 May 2012 05:35, Alexey Shvetsov wrote:
Full clone will be about 1G or so but no more then 2. If we will
drop
changelog it will be much smaller
And if you use git commit signing instead of ebuild manifests,
intra-commit churn will almost be negligib
On 24 May 2012 08:32, Rich Freeman wrote:
>
> Sure. The slow commit rate encourages careful deliberation before
> hitting the enter key, which therefore improves quality.
>
> Then, if you do make a mistake the slow commit rate means that fixing
> that mistake can take a long time, which increases
On 24 May 2012 05:35, Alexey Shvetsov wrote:
> Full clone will be about 1G or so but no more then 2. If we will drop
> changelog it will be much smaller
>
And if you use git commit signing instead of ebuild manifests,
intra-commit churn will almost be negligible. :D
--
Kent
perl -e "print su
El mié, 23-05-2012 a las 17:00 -0300, Ezequiel Garcia escribió:
> On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Arun Raghavan
> wrote:
> > I, for one, think we should stay with CVS and leave all this git
> > Linusware to the new-fangled Fedora kids with their fancy init systems
> > and tight coupling. CVS was
On Thursday, May 24, 2012 07:56:58 AM Michał Górny wrote:
> On Wed, 23 May 2012 16:14:53 -0500
>
> Dan Douglas wrote:
> > If not I will be leaving Gentoo for Funtoo in the near future, though
> > there are disadvantages to doing this I don't look forward to dealing
> > with.
>
> Most of us will pr
On Wed, 23 May 2012 16:14:53 -0500
Dan Douglas wrote:
> If not I will be leaving Gentoo for Funtoo in the near future, though
> there are disadvantages to doing this I don't look forward to dealing
> with.
Most of us will probably be doing that :P.
--
Best regards,
Michał Górny
signature.asc
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Arun Raghavan wrote:
> I, for one, think we should stay with CVS and leave all this git
> Linusware to the new-fangled Fedora kids with their fancy init systems
> and tight coupling. CVS was good enough for my grandfather, and it's
> good enough for you.
> --
> Aru
Michael Weber writes:
> "Clean cut" turns of cvs access on a given and announced timestamp,
> rsync-generation/updates is suspended (no input -> no changes), some
> magic scripts prepare the git repo (according to [3], some hours
> duration) and we all checkout the tree (might be some funny massiv
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 05/23/2012 11:14 PM, Dan Douglas wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 23, 2012 04:47:04 PM Robin H. Johnson wrote:
>> 2. rsync generation is NOT going away. Users will still be using
>> it.
First, I'd stick with the current rsync to spread the tree (mirror
On Wednesday, May 23, 2012 04:47:04 PM Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> 2. rsync generation is NOT going away. Users will still be using it.
Would users have a way of gaining read-only access? This would be EXTREMELY
helpful. If not I will be leaving Gentoo for Funtoo in the near future, though
there ar
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:37:55PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Wed, 23 May 2012 15:25:54 -0500
> William Hubbs wrote:
>
> > On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 01:07:08AM +0530, Arun Raghavan wrote:
> > > I, for one, think we should stay with CVS and leave all this git
> > > Linusware to the new-fangled
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 05/23/2012 07:06 PM, Alexey Shvetsov wrote:
> Isnt cvs too sloow on mips? git is much more faster. Same for arm.
> About big repos, well why not use shallow cloned repo. It will work
> with plane history
Can we please cut that out.
I do/did arc
On Wed, 23 May 2012 15:25:54 -0500
William Hubbs wrote:
> On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 01:07:08AM +0530, Arun Raghavan wrote:
> > I, for one, think we should stay with CVS and leave all this git
> > Linusware to the new-fangled Fedora kids with their fancy init
> > systems and tight coupling. CVS was
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 05/23/2012 06:58 PM, Justin wrote:
> Was this a vote for or against a quick proceeding towards git?
No, just to decide if git-cvsserver (providing cvs access) should be
part of an "git master tree" szenario.
In bugzie: Should https://bugs.gentoo.
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 4:00 PM, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
> On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Arun Raghavan
> wrote:
>> I, for one, think we should stay with CVS and leave all this git
>> Linusware to the new-fangled Fedora kids with their fancy init systems
>> and tight coupling. CVS was good enou
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 01:07:08AM +0530, Arun Raghavan wrote:
> I, for one, think we should stay with CVS and leave all this git
> Linusware to the new-fangled Fedora kids with their fancy init systems
> and tight coupling. CVS was good enough for my grandfather, and it's
> good enough for you.
I
Arun Raghavan писал 2012-05-23 22:37:
I, for one, think we should stay with CVS and leave all this git
Linusware to the new-fangled Fedora kids with their fancy init
systems
and tight coupling. CVS was good enough for my grandfather, and it's
good enough for you.
CVS is damn slow. On every cv
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Arun Raghavan wrote:
> I, for one, think we should stay with CVS and leave all this git
> Linusware to the new-fangled Fedora kids with their fancy init systems
> and tight coupling. CVS was good enough for my grandfather, and it's
> good enough for you.
Perhaps
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
+1 for git
I am more used to it, I find it easier to use regarding the utilities
as well as the gui and it is more consistent.
The fact alone that I can update a single directory in CVS without
updating all others can cause breakage, cause repoman che
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 9:37 PM, Arun Raghavan wrote:
> I, for one, think we should stay with CVS and leave all this git
> Linusware to the new-fangled Fedora kids with their fancy init systems
> and tight coupling. CVS was good enough for my grandfather, and it's
> good enough for you.
The diffe
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 1:07 AM, Arun Raghavan wrote:
> I, for one, think we should stay with CVS and leave all this git
> Linusware to the new-fangled Fedora kids with their fancy init systems
> and tight coupling. CVS was good enough for my grandfather, and it's
> good enough for you.
>
+1
--
I, for one, think we should stay with CVS and leave all this git
Linusware to the new-fangled Fedora kids with their fancy init systems
and tight coupling. CVS was good enough for my grandfather, and it's
good enough for you.
--
Arun Raghavan
http://arunraghavan.net/
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (aru
-1
--
Rafael Goncalves Martins
Gentoo Linux developer
http://rafaelmartins.eng.br/
Alexey Shvetsov schrieb:
>> Shallow clones are also read-only last I checked.
>
> That isnt true =) you can commit from shallow clone if and only if
> original repo doesnt have a branching and merging points before and
> after shallow clone point respectively
There can also be breakage when some
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 01:32:45PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 1:22 PM, Alexey Shvetsov wrote:
> >
> > That isnt true =) you can commit from shallow clone if and only if original
> > repo doesnt have a branching and merging points before and after shallow
> > clone point
Rich Freeman писал 2012-05-23 20:32:
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 1:22 PM, Alexey Shvetsov
wrote:
That isnt true =) you can commit from shallow clone if and only if
original
repo doesnt have a branching and merging points before and after
shallow
clone point respectively
Is that going to be
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 1:22 PM, Alexey Shvetsov wrote:
>
> That isnt true =) you can commit from shallow clone if and only if original
> repo doesnt have a branching and merging points before and after shallow
> clone point respectively
>
Is that going to be a practical condition to maintain?
Robin H. Johnson писал 2012-05-23 20:19:
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 07:58:17PM +0300, Alexey Shvetsov wrote:
Isnt git works with shallow clone? like
# git clone --depth 1
git+ssh://gitrepo.uri::repo
So you can clone in this manner and push changes back
Also for depth = 1 pack size will be simila
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 07:58:17PM +0300, Alexey Shvetsov wrote:
> Isnt git works with shallow clone? like
> # git clone --depth 1
> git+ssh://gitrepo.uri::repo
>
> So you can clone in this manner and push changes back
>
> Also for depth = 1 pack size will be similar to gzipped rsync snapshot
Robin H. Johnson писал 2012-05-23 19:47:
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 02:42:37PM +0200, Michael Weber wrote:
i've looked at the blockers of "[TRACKER] portage migration to git"
[1] and want to discuss "testing git-cvsserver" [2].
There are two proposed scenarios how to migrate the developers write
a
Matt Turner писал 2012-05-23 19:59:
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 12:47 PM, Robin H. Johnson
wrote:
2. Arches were Git repos are too heavy (Kumba wanted this for MIPS)
Please don't go to this trouble for the ability to commit to portage
on *really* slow systems.
Isnt cvs too sloow on mips? git is
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 12:47 PM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> 2. Arches were Git repos are too heavy (Kumba wanted this for MIPS)
Please don't go to this trouble for the ability to commit to portage
on *really* slow systems.
On 23.05.2012 18:47, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 02:42:37PM +0200, Michael Weber wrote:
>> i've looked at the blockers of "[TRACKER] portage migration to git"
>> [1] and want to discuss "testing git-cvsserver" [2].
>>
>> There are two proposed scenarios how to migrate the deve
Robin H. Johnson писал 2012-05-23 19:47:
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 02:42:37PM +0200, Michael Weber wrote:
i've looked at the blockers of "[TRACKER] portage migration to git"
[1] and want to discuss "testing git-cvsserver" [2].
There are two proposed scenarios how to migrate the developers write
a
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 02:42:37PM +0200, Michael Weber wrote:
> i've looked at the blockers of "[TRACKER] portage migration to git"
> [1] and want to discuss "testing git-cvsserver" [2].
>
> There are two proposed scenarios how to migrate the developers write
> access to the portage tree.
The pri
Michał Górny писал 2012-05-23 19:33:
On Wed, 23 May 2012 14:42:37 +0200
Michael Weber wrote:
*if you still read this* *wow*
Please discuss my arguments and come to the conclusions to
RESO/WONT-FIX "testing git-cvsserver", make a "clean cut" and remove
this bug from the blockers of "[TRACKER]
> On Wed, 23 May 2012 14:42:37 +0200
>
> Kill it! And while we're at it, kill ChangeLogs as well!
>
> /me hides...
+1
+1
+1
+1
...
--
Andreas K. Huettel
Gentoo Linux developer
kde, sci, arm, tex, printing
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:43 AM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
>
> Looks like the bloodbath begins. I too am in favor of killing cvs.
Please, let it die. I'll miss my scripts, but I'll gladly deal with
that over whatever breakage comes along every time some cvs plugin
messes up the tree, or we can'
On Wed, 23 May 2012 14:42:37 +0200
Michael Weber wrote:
> *if you still read this* *wow*
>
> Please discuss my arguments and come to the conclusions to
> RESO/WONT-FIX "testing git-cvsserver", make a "clean cut" and remove
> this bug from the blockers of "[TRACKER] portage migration to git".
Ki
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
+1 for git switch.
git-cvsserver would make sense if it would be completely transparent
for cvs client. and it's not. so why bother setuping fragile things?
- --
Sergei
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAY
On 23/05/12 14:42, Michael Weber wrote:
> Hi,
>
> i've looked at the blockers of "[TRACKER] portage migration to git"
> [1] and want to discuss "testing git-cvsserver" [2].
>
> There are two proposed scenarios how to migrate the developers write
> access to the portage tree.
>
> "Clean cut" tur
On 05/23/2012 10:39 AM, Alexey Shvetsov wrote:
+1 for killing cvs
Looks like the bloodbath begins. I too am in favor of killing cvs.
--
Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D.
Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened]
E-Mail: bluen...@gentoo.org
GnuPG FP : 8040 5A4D 8709 21B1 1A88 33CE 979C AF40 D045 5535
G
+1 for killing cvs
Johannes Huber писал 2012-05-23 15:54:
Am Mittwoch 23 Mai 2012, 14:42:37 schrieb Michael Weber:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Hi,
i've looked at the blockers of "[TRACKER] portage migration to git"
[1] and want to discuss "testing git-c
Please kill CVS with fire!
I've been waiting for this since 2009.
--
Fabio Erculiani
On 05/23/2012 07:54 AM, Johannes Huber wrote:
> Am Mittwoch 23 Mai 2012, 14:42:37 schrieb Michael Weber:
> Hi,
>
> i've looked at the blockers of "[TRACKER] portage migration to git"
> [1] and want to discuss "testing git-cvsserver" [2].
>
> There are two proposed scenarios how to migrate the dev
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 05/23/2012 09:25 AM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
>
>>
>> Please discuss my arguments and come to the conclusions to
>> RESO/WONT-FIX "testing git-cvsserver", make a "clean cut" and
>> remove this bug from the blockers of "[TRACKER] portage migrat
>
> Please discuss my arguments and come to the conclusions to
> RESO/WONT-FIX "testing git-cvsserver", make a "clean cut" and remove
> this bug from the blockers of "[TRACKER] portage migration to git".
>
+1
Please cut cvs support once and for all.
--
Andreas K. Huettel
Gentoo Linux develop
On May 23, 2012 1:55 PM, "Johannes Huber" wrote:
>
> Am Mittwoch 23 Mai 2012, 14:42:37 schrieb Michael Weber:
>
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>
> > Hash: SHA256
>
> >
>
> > Hi,
>
> >
>
> > i've looked at the blockers of "[TRACKER] portage migration to git"
>
> > [1] and want to discuss "t
Am Mittwoch 23 Mai 2012, 14:42:37 schrieb Michael Weber:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> Hi,
>
> i've looked at the blockers of "[TRACKER] portage migration to git"
> [1] and want to discuss "testing git-cvsserver" [2].
>
> There are two proposed scenarios how to migrate
70 matches
Mail list logo
