Hi,
>
> > Also worth noting, we should be pigning Gerald to plan
> moving embperl
> > over to the perl svn repos as well.
>
That would be great. I am using svn all over the place for a long time and
Embperl is one of the last things where I need to deal with CVS, so I am
happy to move the Emb
[adjusting the CC list]
Philippe M. Chiasson wrote:
Stas Bekman wrote:
Geoffrey Young wrote:
[...]
so, rock on svn.
yes, yes, I'm +1. Thanks for taking care of it.
Don't forget about preserving the frozen cvs though. I have lots of
modified files all over.
Yah, the CVS repository will remain for
Stas Bekman wrote:
Geoffrey Young wrote:
[...]
so, rock on svn.
yes, yes, I'm +1. Thanks for taking care of it.
Don't forget about preserving the frozen cvs though. I have lots of
modified files all over.
Yah, the CVS repository will remain for a long time read-only. (don't
exactly know what *lon
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
On Sun, Nov 14, 2004 at 06:30:30PM -0500, Stas Bekman wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: jerenkrantz
Date: Sun Nov 14 15:08:54 2004
New Revision: 65642
Added:
perl/modperl/docs/
Log:
Create modperl docs directory.
So now all modperl-* will live under the same tree? Ca
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Author: jerenkrantz
Date: Sun Nov 14 15:08:54 2004
New Revision: 65642
Added:
perl/modperl/docs/
Log:
Create modperl docs directory.
So now all modperl-* will live under the same tree? Can we still have a
different commit email address for each sub-project? e.g. this co
Geoffrey Young wrote:
It's just that someone needs to simultaneously move modperl-2.0 to
subversion too. And modperl-docs too, since they are checked out into
modperl-2.0 check out. As long as this is all done at once there should
be no problem. None of these projects had any branching so it should
> It was easy to reproduce and it's now fixed in cvs:
>
> - HvNAME(SvSTASH(SvRV(in;
> + (SvRV(in) && SvSTASH(SvRV(in)))
> + ? HvNAME(SvSTASH(SvRV(in)))
> + : "unknown");
>
> and added the relevant tests.
> It's just that someone needs to simultaneously move modperl-2.0 to
> subversion too. And modperl-docs too, since they are checked out into
> modperl-2.0 check out. As long as this is all done at once there should
> be no problem. None of these projects had any branching so it shouldn't
> be a pr
Radoslaw Zielinski wrote:
Sorry for the delay, I couldn't make it sooner.
Stas Bekman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [03-11-2004 02:30]:
Radoslaw Zielinski wrote:
[...]
* It messes with @INC, changing the way it should be parsed.
Originally, if you see $inc_file/Foo/Bar/Baz.pm, you know it's the
Foo::Bar::B
Sorry for the delay, I couldn't make it sooner.
Stas Bekman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [03-11-2004 02:30]:
> Radoslaw Zielinski wrote:
[...]
>> * It messes with @INC, changing the way it should be parsed.
>> Originally, if you see $inc_file/Foo/Bar/Baz.pm, you know it's the
>> Foo::Bar::Baz perl modu
10 matches
Mail list logo
