On Sat, 5 Jun 2004, Joshua Hoblitt wrote:
> Are you going to go ahead with the conversion? I'm eager to switch to SVK.
Since no one said no, I do plan to, it's just a matter of tuits, which
have been in amazingly short supply for a while.
-dave
/*===
House Absolute Consult
Hi Dave,
Are you going to go ahead with the conversion? I'm eager to switch to SVK.
Cheers,
-J
--
On Wed, 21 Apr 2004, Dave Rolsky wrote:
> I'm getting fed up with the damn sourceforge CVS instability and slowness.
>
> What do people think of moving to Subversion, hosted either on my own bo
On Fri, Apr 23, 2004 at 12:54:34AM +0100, David Wheeler wrote:
> On Apr 22, 2004, at 8:54 PM, Tim Bunce wrote:
>
> >I should have added that the emails include the diff.
No. See example below.
> As an attachment? That's what has distinguished activitymail over the
> last two years or so.
It's
On Apr 22, 2004, at 8:54 PM, Tim Bunce wrote:
I should have added that the emails include the diff.
As an attachment? That's what has distinguished activitymail over the
last two years or so.
David
On Apr 22, 2004, at 5:14 PM, Dave Rolsky wrote:
It's well worth the move, IMO.
Yeah, I think so, too. I'll check it out as soon as I have the tuits
and Ask gives me the a-ok.
Cheers,
David
I should have added that the emails include the diff.
Tim.
On Thu, Apr 22, 2004 at 04:07:11PM +0100, David Wheeler wrote:
> On Apr 22, 2004, at 4:01 PM, Tim Bunce wrote:
>
> >I don't know what activitymail is, but I do know that svn.perl.org
> >sends emails for each commit (to a mailing list tha
On Thu, 22 Apr 2004, David Wheeler wrote:
> On Apr 22, 2004, at 4:01 PM, Tim Bunce wrote:
>
> > I don't know what activitymail is, but I do know that svn.perl.org
> > sends emails for each commit (to a mailing list that corresponds to the
> > module being changed).
>
> That's what activitymail doe
On Thu, 22 Apr 2004, David Wheeler wrote:
> My only objection to svn is that activitymail doesn't work with it.
> Perhaps someone could convince the maintainer of that program to find
> the tuits to port it, eh?
Um, yeah, that maintainer should! There are two scripts that come with
Subversion fo
On Apr 22, 2004, at 4:01 PM, Tim Bunce wrote:
I don't know what activitymail is, but I do know that svn.perl.org
sends emails for each commit (to a mailing list that corresponds to the
module being changed).
That's what activitymail does, but it sends the diffs from the (CVS)
commits, too, option
On Thu, Apr 22, 2004 at 08:39:17AM +0100, David Wheeler wrote:
> On Apr 22, 2004, at 5:45 AM, Dave Rolsky wrote:
>
> >Objections? Comments?
>
> My only objection to svn is that activitymail doesn't work with it.
> Perhaps someone could convince the maintainer of that program to find
> the tuit
On Apr 22, 2004, at 2:23 PM, John Peacock wrote:
Rather than try and force activitymail to work with Subversion, it is
probably more profitable to look at the existing scripts and improve
them to correspond to what you expect the e-mail's to look like.
Agreed, that's what I'll do when I find the
David Wheeler wrote:
My only objection to svn is that activitymail doesn't work with it.
Perhaps someone could convince the maintainer of that program to find
the tuits to port it, eh?
I haven't used activitymail, but from a quick reading of the POD, it seems like
a waste to try and port it to S
On Apr 22, 2004, at 5:45 AM, Dave Rolsky wrote:
Objections? Comments?
My only objection to svn is that activitymail doesn't work with it.
Perhaps someone could convince the maintainer of that program to find
the tuits to port it, eh?
Otherwise, I'm thinking of moving my projects to svn, too, p
Just on a usability note, I'm in favor. I've been using svn on several
in-house projects over the last year or so, with no complaints -- well,
setting up the server end is somewhat involved, but once it's set up you
rarely have to visit it again.
The added functionality (proper handling of dire
On Thu, 22 Apr 2004, Daisuke Maki wrote:
> Too bad we can't just get a free copy of Perforce. I really enjoyed it
> at my previous work.
We probably could, but I wouldn't use it. I prefer free software over
propietary when given the choice, and Subversion works quite well.
-dave
/*===
Hmmm, I haven't used Subversion before, but as long as there's something
for OS X, it's fine... (And speaking of which:
http://www.pycs.net/bbum/2004/3/16/).
Too bad we can't just get a free copy of Perforce. I really enjoyed it
at my previous work.
Now I need to go read about svn.
--d
Dave
On Wed, 21 Apr 2004, Joshua Hoblitt wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Apr 2004, Dave Rolsky wrote:
>
> > I'm getting fed up with the damn sourceforge CVS instability and slowness.
>
> But at least it's backed up occasionaly...
>
> > What do people think of moving to Subversion, hosted either on my own box
> > (
On Wed, 21 Apr 2004, Dave Rolsky wrote:
> I'm getting fed up with the damn sourceforge CVS instability and slowness.
But at least it's backed up occasionaly...
> What do people think of moving to Subversion, hosted either on my own box
> (svn.urth.org) or maybe svn.perl.org if I can talk Ask and
18 matches
Mail list logo
