Re: dsource.org moved

2015-08-22 Thread Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d-announce

On Friday, 21 August 2015 at 17:05:42 UTC, tired_eyes wrote:
So, four months later, can we have some kind of warning banner 
on dsource.org?


Done.


Re: dsource.org moved

2015-08-22 Thread tired_eyes via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Saturday, 22 August 2015 at 13:03:34 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev 
wrote:

On Friday, 21 August 2015 at 17:05:42 UTC, tired_eyes wrote:
So, four months later, can we have some kind of warning banner 
on dsource.org?


Done.


Excellent, thank you! It was a source of confusion.


Re: dsource.org moved

2015-08-21 Thread tired_eyes via Digitalmars-d-announce
So, four months later, can we have some kind of warning banner on 
dsource.org?





Re: dsource.org moved

2015-04-27 Thread Kagamin via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Saturday, 25 April 2015 at 03:36:24 UTC, Rikki Cattermole 
wrote:

[0] http://www.sourcetreeapp.com/


Git got a proper visualization of commit tree? :)


Re: dsource.org moved

2015-04-27 Thread Rikki Cattermole via Digitalmars-d-announce

On 28/04/2015 12:56 a.m., Kagamin wrote:

On Saturday, 25 April 2015 at 03:36:24 UTC, Rikki Cattermole wrote:

[0] http://www.sourcetreeapp.com/


Git got a proper visualization of commit tree? :)


Better then anything else out there!


Re: dsource.org moved

2015-04-24 Thread Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-announce

On Friday, 24 April 2015 at 21:48:30 UTC, Stewart Gordon wrote:

On 22/04/2015 08:20, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
snip
If you're forking a project on Github you get your own copy of 
the project. The projects
are linked but the repositories are not. What I mean by that 
is on your fork you'll see
that it is a fork with a link back to the original project. 
From the original project you

can also view all forks.

The repositories are not linked in the sense that there's no 
automatic syncing of code
between them. The fork needs to manually pull from the 
original repository to get the

latest changes.


I guess the word link has too many meanings. :p

So a fork is really a working copy of the master repository, 
and the code that the user will typically edit is in turn a 
working copy of this.  And commit and push in Git terms 
basically mean to commit to the local fork and to commit the 
fork to the master repo respectively.


So if pull means to update one's fork, what is a pull 
request requesting exactly?


With git, technically, no repo is more important than another, 
since it's a distributed source control system rather than a 
centralized one. Everyone gets their own, independent repo, with 
its own commit history. Pushing and pulling and whatnot don't 
care about which repo is the primary repo or anything like 
that. It's just taking a set of commits from one repo and putting 
them in the other repo.


Committing is _always_ to your local repo. You never commit to 
another repo.


Pushing is when you control both repo A and repo B, and from 
the machine with repo A on it, you push a set of commits into 
repo B. It therefore requires that you have the permissions to 
manipulate repo A directly on the machine that it's on (since 
you're doing the operation on that machine) and that you have 
write permissions for repo B (since you're commanding repo B to 
take your commits from repo A).


Pulling is when you do the commands from the machine with repo 
A on it and take the code from repo B and put it in repo A. You 
only need read permissions for repo B in that case (so it could 
be a public repo that you have no control over whatsoever).


The typical workflow with github is that you create a branch on 
your local machine and make commits with whatever changes you're 
making. You then push that branch into your github repo for that 
project. So, you've created a branch there which then matches 
your local branch (and if you need to make further commits, those 
would have to be pushed separately). Then you create a pull 
request from your github repo for the target repo (typically the 
primary repo for the project, but it could be the repo of someone 
else you're working with). Typically, it's targeting the master 
branch of the target repo, but it could be for any branch in that 
repo. Whoever controls the target repo is notified of your pull 
request. They can then look over the code, suggest changes, etc. 
Once they're satisfied with it, they can hit the merge button on 
github. That tells github to pull the code from the branch in 
your github repo into the target repo. After that, anyone who 
pulls from the target repo will get your changes. And normally, 
you'd delete the branch that you used for that pull request and 
create a new one for whatever your next set of changes are.


So, normally, you only push to your own github repo, and 
everything else is done via pulling.


Now, you _can_ just push to the primary repo rather than your own 
github repo if you have the permissions for it, but then the code 
doesn't get reviewed, and only folks who have push permissions 
for that repo can do that (which most folks won't have). 
Operating that way is basically operating how svn operates, which 
pretty much everyone using git will tell you not to do.


Hopefully, that explanation helps, but you really should read 
some of the guides out there for this, since they'll have pretty 
pictures (which can help considerably) and probably explain it 
better than I do. e.g.


https://guides.github.com/introduction/flow/index.html
http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/
https://blogs.atlassian.com/2014/01/simple-git-workflow-simple/
https://sandofsky.com/blog/git-workflow.html

- Jonathan M Davis


Re: dsource.org moved

2015-04-24 Thread Rikki Cattermole via Digitalmars-d-announce

On 25/04/2015 3:33 p.m., Jonathan M Davis wrote:

On Friday, 24 April 2015 at 21:48:30 UTC, Stewart Gordon wrote:

On 22/04/2015 08:20, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
snip

If you're forking a project on Github you get your own copy of the
project. The projects
are linked but the repositories are not. What I mean by that is on
your fork you'll see
that it is a fork with a link back to the original project. From the
original project you
can also view all forks.

The repositories are not linked in the sense that there's no
automatic syncing of code
between them. The fork needs to manually pull from the original
repository to get the
latest changes.


I guess the word link has too many meanings. :p

So a fork is really a working copy of the master repository, and the
code that the user will typically edit is in turn a working copy of
this.  And commit and push in Git terms basically mean to commit
to the local fork and to commit the fork to the master repo respectively.

So if pull means to update one's fork, what is a pull request
requesting exactly?


With git, technically, no repo is more important than another, since
it's a distributed source control system rather than a centralized one.
Everyone gets their own, independent repo, with its own commit history.
Pushing and pulling and whatnot don't care about which repo is the
primary repo or anything like that. It's just taking a set of commits
from one repo and putting them in the other repo.

Committing is _always_ to your local repo. You never commit to another
repo.

Pushing is when you control both repo A and repo B, and from the
machine with repo A on it, you push a set of commits into repo B. It
therefore requires that you have the permissions to manipulate repo A
directly on the machine that it's on (since you're doing the operation
on that machine) and that you have write permissions for repo B (since
you're commanding repo B to take your commits from repo A).

Pulling is when you do the commands from the machine with repo A on it
and take the code from repo B and put it in repo A. You only need read
permissions for repo B in that case (so it could be a public repo that
you have no control over whatsoever).

The typical workflow with github is that you create a branch on your
local machine and make commits with whatever changes you're making. You
then push that branch into your github repo for that project. So, you've
created a branch there which then matches your local branch (and if you
need to make further commits, those would have to be pushed separately).
Then you create a pull request from your github repo for the target repo
(typically the primary repo for the project, but it could be the repo of
someone else you're working with). Typically, it's targeting the master
branch of the target repo, but it could be for any branch in that repo.
Whoever controls the target repo is notified of your pull request. They
can then look over the code, suggest changes, etc. Once they're
satisfied with it, they can hit the merge button on github. That tells
github to pull the code from the branch in your github repo into the
target repo. After that, anyone who pulls from the target repo will get
your changes. And normally, you'd delete the branch that you used for
that pull request and create a new one for whatever your next set of
changes are.

So, normally, you only push to your own github repo, and everything else
is done via pulling.

Now, you _can_ just push to the primary repo rather than your own github
repo if you have the permissions for it, but then the code doesn't get
reviewed, and only folks who have push permissions for that repo can do
that (which most folks won't have). Operating that way is basically
operating how svn operates, which pretty much everyone using git will
tell you not to do.

Hopefully, that explanation helps, but you really should read some of
the guides out there for this, since they'll have pretty pictures (which
can help considerably) and probably explain it better than I do. e.g.

https://guides.github.com/introduction/flow/index.html
http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/
https://blogs.atlassian.com/2014/01/simple-git-workflow-simple/
https://sandofsky.com/blog/git-workflow.html

- Jonathan M Davis


Also if you are on Windows or OSX, use SourceTree[0]. I cannot recommend 
this enough.
It'll install git, wrap it up nicely for you and even show pretty 
imagery regarding the current state of the repo!


[0] http://www.sourcetreeapp.com/


Re: dsource.org moved

2015-04-24 Thread Stewart Gordon via Digitalmars-d-announce

On 22/04/2015 08:20, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
snip

If you're forking a project on Github you get your own copy of the project. The 
projects
are linked but the repositories are not. What I mean by that is on your fork 
you'll see
that it is a fork with a link back to the original project. From the original 
project you
can also view all forks.

The repositories are not linked in the sense that there's no automatic syncing 
of code
between them. The fork needs to manually pull from the original repository to 
get the
latest changes.


I guess the word link has too many meanings. :p

So a fork is really a working copy of the master repository, and the code that the user 
will typically edit is in turn a working copy of this.  And commit and push in Git 
terms basically mean to commit to the local fork and to commit the fork to the master repo 
respectively.


So if pull means to update one's fork, what is a pull request requesting 
exactly?

Stewart.

--
My email address is valid but not my primary mailbox and not checked regularly.  Please 
keep replies on the 'group where everybody may benefit.


Re: dsource.org moved

2015-04-22 Thread Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d-announce

On 2015-04-22 00:06, Stewart Gordon wrote:


One of the comments there: Or you make your repository public, then
everyone (who is not a collaborator) has read-only access

And everyone who _is_ a collaborator has what?


Push access (svn would call this commit access). I don't think 
collaborators have access to the settings of the project thought. 
Perhaps that is dependent on what role the collaborator has.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork_%28software_development%29
implies that a fork is a divergent development branch - a separate copy
of the project that has no ongoing link to the original.  Is the Git
concept of a fork different?


If you're forking a project on Github you get your own copy of the 
project. The projects are linked but the repositories are not. What I 
mean by that is on your fork you'll see that it is a fork with a link 
back to the original project. From the original project you can also 
view all forks.


The repositories are not linked in the sense that there's no automatic 
syncing of code between them. The fork needs to manually pull from the 
original repository to get the latest changes.


--
/Jacob Carlborg


Re: dsource.org moved

2015-04-21 Thread Stewart Gordon via Digitalmars-d-announce

On 21/04/2015 00:35, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
snip

In the other thread I referred to this
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5010754/github-collaborators-have-commit-access
which makes it sound as though it's possible to do the same thing in GitHub.  
Is that
page wrong?


This question pertains to private GitHub repositories (a feature of paid plans).


One of the comments there: Or you make your repository public, then everyone (who is not 
a collaborator) has read-only access


And everyone who _is_ a collaborator has what?


Regardless, I do not recommend attempting to shoehorn your previous SVN 
workflow into git
and GitHub. The usual way contributions are done with GitHub is that anyone 
with a GitHub
account can create a pull request (a series of commits, initially published on 
their own
fork of the repository), which the repository owner (or collaborators) can then 
accept
(merge) into the main repository.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork_%28software_development%29
implies that a fork is a divergent development branch - a separate copy of the project 
that has no ongoing link to the original.  Is the Git concept of a fork different?



Instead of designating a group of committers as in SVN,
you would simply need to review pull requests and click the merge button to 
accept them.
If you do not foresee yourself being available often enough to review/accept 
pull
requests, you can designate a few collaborators who can do it as well.


Maybe I'll do that.  Most of the time I should be available enough, but there's always the 
chance that I'll be away for a week every now and again (possibly longer if I'm lucky).


Stewart.

--
My email address is valid but not my primary mailbox and not checked regularly.  Please 
keep replies on the 'group where everybody may benefit.


Re: dsource.org moved

2015-04-20 Thread Stewart Gordon via Digitalmars-d-announce

On 20/04/2015 00:25, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
snip

Even if he had, what would be the point?  It would greatly slow down the whole 
process.
We have SVN repositories so that people can just put their updates straight in,


Only those who have access can do that. Getting patches into the bindings 
repository has
been historically difficult. Committers have had to commit patches on behalf of 
other people.

snip

?? When I worked on the project on dsource, until it stopped working recently I generally 
had no trouble just committing my updates using SVN.  I didn't have to create patches at 
all.  As I understood it, neither did anybody else who helped out (after all, it wasn't 
_my_ dsource project).


Stewart.

--
My email address is valid but not my primary mailbox and not checked regularly.  Please 
keep replies on the 'group where everybody may benefit.


Re: dsource.org moved

2015-04-20 Thread Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d-announce

On Monday, 20 April 2015 at 23:27:58 UTC, Stewart Gordon wrote:

On 21/04/2015 00:19, Stewart Gordon wrote:
snip
?? When I worked on the project on dsource, until it stopped 
working recently I generally
had no trouble just committing my updates using SVN.  I didn't 
have to create patches at
all.  As I understood it, neither did anybody else who helped 
out (after all, it wasn't

_my_ dsource project).


OK, so come to think about it, maybe those who were 
collaborating were given commit access on dsource as and when.


I believe this is the case. That, or they simply didn't have SVN 
installed. They sent a PR to my GitHub mirror instead.



In the other thread I referred to this
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5010754/github-collaborators-have-commit-access
which makes it sound as though it's possible to do the same 
thing in GitHub.  Is that page wrong?


This question pertains to private GitHub repositories (a feature 
of paid plans).


Regardless, I do not recommend attempting to shoehorn your 
previous SVN workflow into git and GitHub. The usual way 
contributions are done with GitHub is that anyone with a GitHub 
account can create a pull request (a series of commits, initially 
published on their own fork of the repository), which the 
repository owner (or collaborators) can then accept (merge) into 
the main repository. Instead of designating a group of committers 
as in SVN, you would simply need to review pull requests and 
click the merge button to accept them. If you do not foresee 
yourself being available often enough to review/accept pull 
requests, you can designate a few collaborators who can do it as 
well.


Re: dsource.org moved

2015-04-20 Thread Stewart Gordon via Digitalmars-d-announce

On 21/04/2015 00:19, Stewart Gordon wrote:
snip

?? When I worked on the project on dsource, until it stopped working recently I 
generally
had no trouble just committing my updates using SVN.  I didn't have to create 
patches at
all.  As I understood it, neither did anybody else who helped out (after all, 
it wasn't
_my_ dsource project).


OK, so come to think about it, maybe those who were collaborating were given commit access 
on dsource as and when.  And maybe one or two projects were completely open read/write 
access.  My memory of how access control worked is blurred.


In the other thread I referred to this
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5010754/github-collaborators-have-commit-access
which makes it sound as though it's possible to do the same thing in GitHub.  Is that page 
wrong?


Stewart.

--
My email address is valid but not my primary mailbox and not checked regularly.  Please 
keep replies on the 'group where everybody may benefit.


Re: dsource.org moved

2015-04-19 Thread Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d-announce

On Friday, 17 April 2015 at 21:34:07 UTC, Stewart Gordon wrote:
Has Walter promised us that every pull request for the 
WindowsAPI bindings will be put in right away?


Pull requests are merged once they pass review and automatic 
testing. Walter Bright is not the only person who can merge pull 
requests - anyone with commit access can.


Even if he had, what would be the point?  It would greatly slow 
down the whole process. We have SVN repositories so that people 
can just put their updates straight in,


Only those who have access can do that. Getting patches into the 
bindings repository has been historically difficult. Committers 
have had to commit patches on behalf of other people.


and everyone else not only has access to the update straight 
away but can obtain it with either a one-line command line 
invocation or a few mouse clicks.


Git is not different in this regard. Proposed changes are 
immediately available in your personal fork.


Re: dsource.org moved

2015-04-19 Thread Stewart Gordon via Digitalmars-d-announce

The wiki is terribly broken at the moment.  I just edited a page

http://www.dsource.org/projects/bindings/wiki/WikiStart

and it changed every linebreak to the literal string `\r\n`.  The page looks OK in 
preview, but then it breaks when you actually save it.


Stewart.

--
My email address is valid but not my primary mailbox and not checked regularly.  Please 
keep replies on the 'group where everybody may benefit.


Re: dsource.org moved

2015-04-17 Thread lobo via Digitalmars-d-announce

On Friday, 17 April 2015 at 21:34:07 UTC, Stewart Gordon wrote:

On 17/04/2015 02:19, lobo wrote:
On Thursday, 16 April 2015 at 23:32:17 UTC, Stewart Gordon 
wrote:

snip
I don't understand - how would an average member of the D 
community get into the DMD

package on dlang.org in order to apply these updates?



Get DMD, Druntime and Phobos and build them:
http://wiki.dlang.org/Building_DMD


Why would one need to build DMD in order to make changes to a 
set of API bindings?



Make your changes and test.

Contribute your changes back to D using pull requests.
http://wiki.dlang.org/Pull_Requests


Has Walter promised us that every pull request for the 
WindowsAPI bindings will be put in right away?


Even if he had, what would be the point?  It would greatly slow 
down the whole process. We have SVN repositories so that people 
can just put their updates straight in, and everyone else not 
only has access to the update straight away but can obtain it 
with either a one-line command line invocation or a few mouse 
clicks.  The only problem is that the SVN server that is 
currently hosting the bindings doesn't work properly.  We 
already have a potential solution: moving it across to Github.  
As such, I'm going to see if I can figure out how to do this.


Stewart.


Sorry, my mistake. I thought you were asking about how to 
contribute bindings back to Phobos.


bye,
lobo




Re: dsource.org moved

2015-04-16 Thread lobo via Digitalmars-d-announce

On Thursday, 16 April 2015 at 23:32:17 UTC, Stewart Gordon wrote:

On 16/04/2015 03:35, Rikki Cattermole wrote:

On 16/04/2015 11:25 a.m., Stewart Gordon wrote:

snip
How would we go about committing updates to it when this is 
done?


Let's say there is a new function in gdi.h added.

You would look for the file:
core/sys/windows/windows/gdi.d

And add the function declaration.
Or if it is a whole new file:
Add: core/sys/windows/windows/newFile.d

Add line: public import core.sys.windows.windows.newFile;
To: core/sys/windows/windows/package.d

Basically the same process as now, except spread out across 
more files.


I don't understand - how would an average member of the D 
community get into the DMD package on dlang.org in order to 
apply these updates?



Get DMD, Druntime and Phobos and build them:
http://wiki.dlang.org/Building_DMD

Make your changes and test.

Contribute your changes back to D using pull requests.
http://wiki.dlang.org/Pull_Requests


bye,
lobo


Re: dsource.org moved

2015-04-16 Thread Stewart Gordon via Digitalmars-d-announce

On 16/04/2015 03:35, Rikki Cattermole wrote:

On 16/04/2015 11:25 a.m., Stewart Gordon wrote:

snip

How would we go about committing updates to it when this is done?


Let's say there is a new function in gdi.h added.

You would look for the file:
core/sys/windows/windows/gdi.d

And add the function declaration.
Or if it is a whole new file:
Add: core/sys/windows/windows/newFile.d

Add line: public import core.sys.windows.windows.newFile;
To: core/sys/windows/windows/package.d

Basically the same process as now, except spread out across more files.


I don't understand - how would an average member of the D community get into the DMD 
package on dlang.org in order to apply these updates?


--
My email address is valid but not my primary mailbox and not checked regularly.  Please 
keep replies on the 'group where everybody may benefit.


Re: dsource.org moved

2015-04-15 Thread Rikki Cattermole via Digitalmars-d-announce

On 16/04/2015 11:25 a.m., Stewart Gordon wrote:

On 08/04/2015 03:21, Rikki Cattermole wrote:

On 8/04/2015 9:44 a.m., Stewart Gordon wrote:
snip

Yes, a set of bindings to eventually put into Phobos/druntime was the
aim of the WindowsAPI project from the beginning.  But unfortunately,
progress has been slow.


Instead of moving to Github, this should be done instead. Thanks to
package.d files it
shouldn't be too hard to up and replace into core.sys.windows.windows.


How would we go about committing updates to it when this is done?

Stewart.


Let's say there is a new function in gdi.h added.

You would look for the file:
core/sys/windows/windows/gdi.d

And add the function declaration.
Or if it is a whole new file:
Add: core/sys/windows/windows/newFile.d

Add line: public import core.sys.windows.windows.newFile;
To: core/sys/windows/windows/package.d

Basically the same process as now, except spread out across more files.


Re: dsource.org moved

2015-04-07 Thread Stewart Gordon via Digitalmars-d-announce
I haven't been active on the newsgroups lately, so lose track of what's going on.  Has 
anything happened?


Just now I tried to commit to the bindings project on dsource, but got an error
POST request on '/projects/bindings/!svn/me' failed: 500 Internal Server Error

Has it been doing this for a long time?  Or is it just a temporary problem?  Bindings is 
certainly a project that needs to be kept alive, whether here or somewhere else, but 
either way it needs to be possible to commit to it.


There's already a mirror of bindings on GitHub.

https://github.com/CS-svnmirror/dsource-bindings

I don't know if it would be reasonable to convert this into the live bindings repository. 
 The name 'CS-svnmirror/dsource-bindings' implies that it's a mirror of the dsource repo 
- can the name be changed?  Or would we need to create a new repo on GitHub to carry on 
where the dsource one left off?


Moreover, I haven't taken the time to get to know GitHub.  I've just realised that at 
least it has a wiki facility.  Is it structured in basically the same way as the dsource wiki?


Stewart.

--
My email address is valid but not my primary mailbox and not checked regularly.  Please 
keep replies on the 'group where everybody may benefit.


Re: dsource.org moved

2015-04-07 Thread Suliman via Digitalmars-d-announce
We are hardly work on modern CMS for news sites. It's beta 
version work on dlang.ru I would like to suggest to move dsource 
to our CMS, and make from it's collective blog.




Re: dsource.org moved

2015-04-07 Thread Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d-announce

On Tuesday, 7 April 2015 at 16:33:37 UTC, Stewart Gordon wrote:
I haven't been active on the newsgroups lately, so lose track 
of what's going on.  Has anything happened?


Just now I tried to commit to the bindings project on dsource, 
but got an error
POST request on '/projects/bindings/!svn/me' failed: 500 
Internal Server Error


Has it been doing this for a long time?  Or is it just a 
temporary problem?  Bindings is certainly a project that needs 
to be kept alive, whether here or somewhere else, but either 
way it needs to be possible to commit to it.


Sorry about that. It looks like pushing to SVN is broken. I don't 
remember if this is a new problem. I've just spent two hours 
trying to fix it, and though I thought I made some progress, now 
some Apache module is mysteriously segfaulting. I'm not sure if I 
should spend more time on this.



There's already a mirror of bindings on GitHub.

https://github.com/CS-svnmirror/dsource-bindings


This is my GitHub account for mirrors of SVN repositories.

I don't know if it would be reasonable to convert this into the 
live bindings repository.
 The name 'CS-svnmirror/dsource-bindings' implies that it's a 
mirror of the dsource repo - can the name be changed?  Or would 
we need to create a new repo on GitHub to carry on where the 
dsource one left off?


Yes, we can move the repository to GitHub. Since Git is 
distributed, you could just clone the mirror, create a new 
repository, and push it there. I'll remove my mirror then, to 
avoid confusion.


It's probably past time anyway, as the bindings project is the 
only active project on DSource. Everyone else moved to GitHub 
years ago.


Moreover, I haven't taken the time to get to know GitHub.  I've 
just realised that at least it has a wiki facility.  Is it 
structured in basically the same way as the dsource wiki?


I'm not sure how far the comparison goes. It has a wiki which can 
contain multiple pages which can link to each other, that much I 
can say.


Speaking in broader terms, I think the only useful part of the 
bindings project is the Win32 API. Everything else is provided 
from Derelict or Deimos. Ultimately, I think the bindings should 
be moved to Druntime, but it would take some work to integrate 
them with the existing ones to allow a seamless transition.


Re: dsource.org moved

2015-04-07 Thread Stewart Gordon via Digitalmars-d-announce

On 07/04/2015 19:34, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:

On Tuesday, 7 April 2015 at 16:33:37 UTC, Stewart Gordon wrote:

I haven't been active on the newsgroups lately, so lose track of what's going 
on.  Has
anything happened?

Just now I tried to commit to the bindings project on dsource, but got an error
POST request on '/projects/bindings/!svn/me' failed: 500 Internal Server Error

Has it been doing this for a long time?  Or is it just a temporary problem?  
Bindings is
certainly a project that needs to be kept alive, whether here or somewhere 
else, but
either way it needs to be possible to commit to it.


Sorry about that. It looks like pushing to SVN is broken. I don't remember if 
this is a
new problem. I've just spent two hours trying to fix it, and though I thought I 
made some
progress, now some Apache module is mysteriously segfaulting. I'm not sure if I 
should
spend more time on this.


I've just tried committing again.  And it seems it's generally managing to send one or two 
files and then failing on the next.  (Though admittedly, I didn't think I had *that* many 
pending updates!  They seem to be mostly small tweaks.)


Command: Commit
Modified: C:\Users\Stewart\Documents\Programming\D\win32\aclui.d
Modified: C:\Users\Stewart\Documents\Programming\D\win32\basetyps.d
Modified: C:\Users\Stewart\Documents\Programming\D\win32\commctrl.d
Modified: C:\Users\Stewart\Documents\Programming\D\win32\commdlg.d
Modified: C:\Users\Stewart\Documents\Programming\D\win32\dbt.d
Modified: C:\Users\Stewart\Documents\Programming\D\win32\dhcpcsdk.d
Modified: C:\Users\Stewart\Documents\Programming\D\win32\directx\dsound8.d
Modified: C:\Users\Stewart\Documents\Programming\D\win32\imm.d
Modified: C:\Users\Stewart\Documents\Programming\D\win32\mswsock.d
Modified: C:\Users\Stewart\Documents\Programming\D\win32\ntsecapi.d
Modified: C:\Users\Stewart\Documents\Programming\D\win32\ras.d
Modified: C:\Users\Stewart\Documents\Programming\D\win32\rpcdce.d
Modified: C:\Users\Stewart\Documents\Programming\D\win32\w32api.d
Modified: C:\Users\Stewart\Documents\Programming\D\win32\winbase.d
Modified: C:\Users\Stewart\Documents\Programming\D\win32\windef.d
Modified: C:\Users\Stewart\Documents\Programming\D\win32\winnt.d
Modified: C:\Users\Stewart\Documents\Programming\D\win32\winuser.d
Sending content: C:\Users\Stewart\Documents\Programming\D\win32\ntsecapi.d
Sending content: C:\Users\Stewart\Documents\Programming\D\win32\dbt.d
Sending content: C:\Users\Stewart\Documents\Programming\D\win32\windef.d
Error: Commit failed (details follow):
Error: PUT request on '/projects/bindings/!svn/txr/433-6/trunk/win32/windef.d' 
failed:
Error:  500 Internal Server Error
Error: Additional errors:
Error: DELETE request on '/projects/bindings/!svn/txn/433-6' failed: 500 
Internal
Error:  Server Error
Completed!:


And since the design of SVN is such that commits are atomic, this causes the whole commit 
to fail.  So I guess I'll have to try committing just a few at a time and see if that 
works.  Still, if you can get it working more reliably it would be most helpful.


snip

Yes, we can move the repository to GitHub. Since Git is distributed, you could 
just clone
the mirror, create a new repository, and push it there. I'll remove my mirror 
then, to
avoid confusion.


We would need to make sure people know that the bindings project is finally being moved 
across.  I suppose that we would migrate the wiki pages across at the same time as we do 
this, and replace them on dsource with a notice telling people where to find it.


snip

Speaking in broader terms, I think the only useful part of the bindings project 
is the
Win32 API. Everything else is provided from Derelict or Deimos. Ultimately, I 
think the
bindings should be moved to Druntime, but it would take some work to integrate 
them with
the existing ones to allow a seamless transition.


Yes, a set of bindings to eventually put into Phobos/druntime was the aim of the 
WindowsAPI project from the beginning.  But unfortunately, progress has been slow.


Stewart.

--
My email address is valid but not my primary mailbox and not checked regularly.  Please 
keep replies on the 'group where everybody may benefit.


Re: dsource.org moved

2015-04-07 Thread Stewart Gordon via Digitalmars-d-announce

On 07/04/2015 22:44, Stewart Gordon wrote:
snip

So I guess I'll have to try committing just a few at a time and see if that 
works.

snip

Oh dear, it seems even that doesn't.  It isn't predictable at what point it will fail, but 
every single time it's failing somewhere.  Even if I try to commit just one file at a time.


Stewart.

--
My email address is valid but not my primary mailbox and not checked regularly.  Please 
keep replies on the 'group where everybody may benefit.


Re: dsource.org moved

2015-04-07 Thread Rikki Cattermole via Digitalmars-d-announce

On 8/04/2015 9:44 a.m., Stewart Gordon wrote:
snip

Yes, a set of bindings to eventually put into Phobos/druntime was the
aim of the WindowsAPI project from the beginning.  But unfortunately,
progress has been slow.


Instead of moving to Github, this should be done instead. Thanks to 
package.d files it shouldn't be too hard to up and replace into 
core.sys.windows.windows.




Re: dsource.org moved

2014-12-04 Thread Rainer Schuetze via Digitalmars-d-announce



On 02.12.2014 23:20, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:

DSource in the headlines? In 2014? Shocking, I know.

Since Brad is no longer an active D user, and the website has had spotty
uptime lately, I've offered to take over the hosting and any maintenance.

Although opinions exist that the site should simply be shut down, I
think archiving it would be a better approach. The website has
historical relevance to the D community, and might be required to get
ancient D code running again. For example, we could make things
read-only and make it obvious on every project page that we don't go to
DSource any more. I can't exactly undertake a large redesign, but we
can discuss our options.

Planet D (planet.dsource.org) is moved as well, and should continue to
operate merrily. If your D blog's not there, let me know!


This finally motivated me to move cv2pdb from dsource to github, it's 
now here: https://github.com/rainers/cv2pdb


Trying to add a respective banner to the wiki start page caused the page 
to be unreadable (preview was ok), because all CR LF seemed to be 
escaped in the submitted text. Could this be a result of the move?


Re: dsource.org moved

2014-12-04 Thread Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Thursday, 4 December 2014 at 08:04:05 UTC, Rainer Schuetze 
wrote:



On 02.12.2014 23:20, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:

DSource in the headlines? In 2014? Shocking, I know.

Since Brad is no longer an active D user, and the website has 
had spotty
uptime lately, I've offered to take over the hosting and any 
maintenance.


Although opinions exist that the site should simply be shut 
down, I

think archiving it would be a better approach. The website has
historical relevance to the D community, and might be required 
to get

ancient D code running again. For example, we could make things
read-only and make it obvious on every project page that we 
don't go to
DSource any more. I can't exactly undertake a large redesign, 
but we

can discuss our options.

Planet D (planet.dsource.org) is moved as well, and should 
continue to

operate merrily. If your D blog's not there, let me know!


This finally motivated me to move cv2pdb from dsource to 
github, it's now here: https://github.com/rainers/cv2pdb


Trying to add a respective banner to the wiki start page caused 
the page to be unreadable (preview was ok), because all CR LF 
seemed to be escaped in the submitted text. Could this be a 
result of the move?


Very likely. I'll have some fun debugging this one!

As a workaround, you could replace the page with a one-liner 
pointing to the GitHub repo for now :)


Re: dsource.org moved

2014-12-03 Thread Dejan Lekic via Digitalmars-d-announce

I think DSource should not be shut down, but instead modernised
and open for new D-based projects. We, old D programmers, just
love DSource! :)


Re: dsource.org moved

2014-12-03 Thread Kiith-Sa via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Wednesday, 3 December 2014 at 06:39:34 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev 
wrote:

On Tuesday, 2 December 2014 at 23:02:32 UTC, Kiith-Sa wrote:
On Tuesday, 2 December 2014 at 22:20:29 UTC, Vladimir 
Panteleev wrote:

DSource in the headlines? In 2014? Shocking, I know.

Since Brad is no longer an active D user, and the website has 
had spotty uptime lately, I've offered to take over the 
hosting and any maintenance.


Although opinions exist that the site should simply be shut 
down, I think archiving it would be a better approach. The 
website has historical relevance to the D community, and 
might be required to get ancient D code running again. For 
example, we could make things read-only and make it obvious 
on every project page that we don't go to DSource any more. 
I can't exactly undertake a large redesign, but we can 
discuss our options.


Planet D (planet.dsource.org) is moved as well, and should 
continue to operate merrily. If your D blog's not there, let 
me know!


My blog is not there, but it's not pure D blog:

defenestrate.eu
defenestrate.eu/rss.html


Any way you can provide an RSS or ATOM feed for just the posts 
tagged D?


Don't know any way other than maybe modifying the generator I'm 
using, but I don't have the time to do that in near future (I 
know little about how RSS works/web dev in general so I'd have to 
spend some time learning that too).


I'm using a static site generator (Tinkerer) based on 
Sphinx/ReStructuredText (think Markdown on steroids), so the blog 
is actually a static site.


Re: dsource.org moved

2014-12-03 Thread ketmar via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Wed, 03 Dec 2014 09:13:12 +
Dejan Lekic via Digitalmars-d-announce
digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com wrote:

 I think DSource should not be shut down, but instead modernised
 and open for new D-based projects. We, old D programmers, just
 love DSource! :)
the problem with current dsource is that keeps poping up in first
google results. yesterday my mate asked me why we don't have gtk+
bindings for D. i answered just google gtkD, he did it and the first
result was dsource link, which points just to svn repo, w/o docs and
such. this is disaster.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Re: dsource.org moved

2014-12-03 Thread Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Wednesday, 3 December 2014 at 20:24:05 UTC, ketmar via 
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:

On Wed, 03 Dec 2014 09:13:12 +
Dejan Lekic via Digitalmars-d-announce
digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com wrote:


I think DSource should not be shut down, but instead modernised
and open for new D-based projects. We, old D programmers, just
love DSource! :)
the problem with current dsource is that keeps poping up in 
first
google results. yesterday my mate asked me why we don't have 
gtk+
bindings for D. i answered just google gtkD, he did it and 
the first
result was dsource link, which points just to svn repo, w/o 
docs and

such. this is disaster.


Erm, that was due to a misconfiguration from a last-minute 
change. Sorry. Fixed now.


http://www.dsource.org/projects/gtkd/


Re: dsource.org moved

2014-12-03 Thread Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Wednesday, 3 December 2014 at 20:42:28 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev 
wrote:
On Wednesday, 3 December 2014 at 20:24:05 UTC, ketmar via 
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:

On Wed, 03 Dec 2014 09:13:12 +
Dejan Lekic via Digitalmars-d-announce
digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com wrote:

I think DSource should not be shut down, but instead 
modernised

and open for new D-based projects. We, old D programmers, just
love DSource! :)
the problem with current dsource is that keeps poping up in 
first
google results. yesterday my mate asked me why we don't have 
gtk+
bindings for D. i answered just google gtkD, he did it and 
the first
result was dsource link, which points just to svn repo, w/o 
docs and

such. this is disaster.


Erm, that was due to a misconfiguration from a last-minute 
change. Sorry. Fixed now.


Added monitoring so this (at least this particular problem) won't 
happen again :)


Re: dsource.org moved

2014-12-03 Thread ketmar via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Wed, 03 Dec 2014 20:42:27 +
Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d-announce
digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com wrote:

 On Wednesday, 3 December 2014 at 20:24:05 UTC, ketmar via 
 Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
  On Wed, 03 Dec 2014 09:13:12 +
  Dejan Lekic via Digitalmars-d-announce
  digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com wrote:
 
  I think DSource should not be shut down, but instead modernised
  and open for new D-based projects. We, old D programmers, just
  love DSource! :)
  the problem with current dsource is that keeps poping up in 
  first
  google results. yesterday my mate asked me why we don't have 
  gtk+
  bindings for D. i answered just google gtkD, he did it and 
  the first
  result was dsource link, which points just to svn repo, w/o 
  docs and
  such. this is disaster.
 
 Erm, that was due to a misconfiguration from a last-minute 
 change. Sorry. Fixed now.
thank you. but i mean that dsource.org is still poping up in results
and it contains alot of obsolete projects. some projects was forked
long time ago and their dsource pages weren't updated, some are just
dead. people keep hitting dsource, trying projects and leaving with a
great frustration: ah, nothing is working, what a mess! besides, all
that projects seems dead, so seems D.

i think that the whole dsource site must be shut down and replaced with
a stub (except planetD) to stop this disease. that site was great, but
now it does more harm than good.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Re: dsource.org moved

2014-12-03 Thread ketmar via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Wed, 03 Dec 2014 20:42:27 +
Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d-announce
digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com wrote:

 On Wednesday, 3 December 2014 at 20:24:05 UTC, ketmar via 
 Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
  On Wed, 03 Dec 2014 09:13:12 +
  Dejan Lekic via Digitalmars-d-announce
  digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com wrote:
 
  I think DSource should not be shut down, but instead modernised
  and open for new D-based projects. We, old D programmers, just
  love DSource! :)
  the problem with current dsource is that keeps poping up in 
  first
  google results. yesterday my mate asked me why we don't have 
  gtk+
  bindings for D. i answered just google gtkD, he did it and 
  the first
  result was dsource link, which points just to svn repo, w/o 
  docs and
  such. this is disaster.
 
 Erm, that was due to a misconfiguration from a last-minute 
 change. Sorry. Fixed now.
ah, there is another post in D.learn, where guy tries to find python-d
and hit dsource instead of bitbucket. kill that dsource monster,
please! it hurts the whole community and it hurts newcomers alot!


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Re: dsource.org moved

2014-12-03 Thread Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce

On 12/3/2014 1:32 PM, ketmar via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:

thank you. but i mean that dsource.org is still poping up in results
and it contains alot of obsolete projects. some projects was forked
long time ago and their dsource pages weren't updated, some are just
dead. people keep hitting dsource, trying projects and leaving with a
great frustration: ah, nothing is working, what a mess! besides, all
that projects seems dead, so seems D.

i think that the whole dsource site must be shut down and replaced with
a stub (except planetD) to stop this disease. that site was great, but
now it does more harm than good.


Makes sense.



Re: dsource.org moved

2014-12-03 Thread Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Wednesday, 3 December 2014 at 21:37:33 UTC, ketmar via 
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:

On Wed, 03 Dec 2014 20:42:27 +
Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d-announce
digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com wrote:

On Wednesday, 3 December 2014 at 20:24:05 UTC, ketmar via 
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:

 On Wed, 03 Dec 2014 09:13:12 +
 Dejan Lekic via Digitalmars-d-announce
 digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com wrote:

 I think DSource should not be shut down, but instead 
 modernised
 and open for new D-based projects. We, old D programmers, 
 just

 love DSource! :)
 the problem with current dsource is that keeps poping up in 
 first
 google results. yesterday my mate asked me why we don't have 
 gtk+
 bindings for D. i answered just google gtkD, he did it and 
 the first
 result was dsource link, which points just to svn repo, w/o 
 docs and

 such. this is disaster.

Erm, that was due to a misconfiguration from a last-minute 
change. Sorry. Fixed now.
ah, there is another post in D.learn, where guy tries to find 
python-d

and hit dsource instead of bitbucket. kill that dsource monster,
please! it hurts the whole community and it hurts newcomers 
alot!


Violence is not the answer.

I'll look into adding a warning banner to the site template.


Re: dsource.org moved

2014-12-03 Thread ponce via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Wednesday, 3 December 2014 at 21:32:27 UTC, ketmar via 
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:


i think that the whole dsource site must be shut down and 
replaced with
a stub (except planetD) to stop this disease. that site was 
great, but

now it does more harm than good.


Alternatively: use robots.txt and don't let Google index that.


Re: dsource.org moved

2014-12-03 Thread Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d-announce

On Wednesday, 3 December 2014 at 22:48:50 UTC, ponce wrote:
On Wednesday, 3 December 2014 at 21:32:27 UTC, ketmar via 
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:


i think that the whole dsource site must be shut down and 
replaced with
a stub (except planetD) to stop this disease. that site was 
great, but

now it does more harm than good.


Alternatively: use robots.txt and don't let Google index that.


This will not help: clawling != indexing, and robots.txt only 
stops crawling. robots.txt will not prevent a site from appearing 
in Google search results, and it will not help in lowering a 
site's search popularity. All it'll do is prevent Google from 
showing snippets of Dsource pages, and indexing links from 
DSource.


The existing search result ratings for DSource are because of all 
the existing links to it, and not so much because of the content 
on DSource.


Re: dsource.org moved

2014-12-03 Thread Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce

On 12/3/2014 2:42 PM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:

Violence is not the answer.

I'll look into adding a warning banner to the site template.


Alternatively, replace the pages in dsource with forwarding pages. The page 
forwarded to can have two links - one to the original page, the other to the 
modern one.


Re: dsource.org moved

2014-12-03 Thread ketmar via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Wed, 03 Dec 2014 23:26:41 +
Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d-announce
digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com wrote:

 The existing search result ratings for DSource are because of all 
 the existing links to it, and not so much because of the content 
 on DSource.
that's why it should be replaced with stub. google ranking algos knows
about sites without content and will lower such sites even if they are
linked from alot of other sites.

btw, stub can contain email which authors of the hosted projects can use
to get their sources if necessary. but i doubt that anyone will use it.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Re: dsource.org moved

2014-12-03 Thread Kapps via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Wednesday, 3 December 2014 at 23:26:42 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev 
wrote:
This will not help: clawling != indexing, and robots.txt only 
stops crawling. robots.txt will not prevent a site from 
appearing in Google search results, and it will not help in 
lowering a site's search popularity. All it'll do is prevent 
Google from showing snippets of Dsource pages, and indexing 
links from DSource.


The existing search result ratings for DSource are because of 
all the existing links to it, and not so much because of the 
content on DSource.


What about using the noindex meta tag 
(https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/93710)?


Re: dsource.org moved

2014-12-03 Thread via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Wednesday, 3 December 2014 at 23:26:42 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev 
wrote:
The existing search result ratings for DSource are because of 
all the existing links to it, and not so much because of the 
content on DSource.


The site owner has some control using webmaster tools:

https://support.google.com/webmasters/topic/1724262?hl=enref_topic=3309469

Btw, downloads.dlang.org should specify robots.txt and 
dlang.org/downloads.html should consider specifying 
noindex/nofollow on links.


https://support.google.com/webmasters/answer/79812?hl=en


Re: dsource.org moved

2014-12-02 Thread Kiith-Sa via Digitalmars-d-announce
On Tuesday, 2 December 2014 at 22:20:29 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev 
wrote:

DSource in the headlines? In 2014? Shocking, I know.

Since Brad is no longer an active D user, and the website has 
had spotty uptime lately, I've offered to take over the hosting 
and any maintenance.


Although opinions exist that the site should simply be shut 
down, I think archiving it would be a better approach. The 
website has historical relevance to the D community, and might 
be required to get ancient D code running again. For example, 
we could make things read-only and make it obvious on every 
project page that we don't go to DSource any more. I can't 
exactly undertake a large redesign, but we can discuss our 
options.


Planet D (planet.dsource.org) is moved as well, and should 
continue to operate merrily. If your D blog's not there, let me 
know!


My blog is not there, but it's not pure D blog:

defenestrate.eu
defenestrate.eu/rss.html


Re: dsource.org moved

2014-12-02 Thread Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce

On 12/2/2014 2:20 PM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:

DSource in the headlines? In 2014? Shocking, I know.

Since Brad is no longer an active D user, and the website has had spotty uptime
lately, I've offered to take over the hosting and any maintenance.

Although opinions exist that the site should simply be shut down, I think
archiving it would be a better approach. The website has historical relevance to
the D community, and might be required to get ancient D code running again. For
example, we could make things read-only and make it obvious on every project
page that we don't go to DSource any more. I can't exactly undertake a large
redesign, but we can discuss our options.


This is good news. Keeping it available is what is most important. I wonder if 
the projects themselves can be migrated to github - then if someone wants to 
update one and add it to dub, that'd be cool.




Planet D (planet.dsource.org) is moved as well, and should continue to operate
merrily. If your D blog's not there, let me know!


Pretty dazz!


Re: dsource.org moved

2014-12-02 Thread Brad Anderson via Digitalmars-d-announce

On Tuesday, 2 December 2014 at 23:02:32 UTC, Kiith-Sa wrote:

[snip]

My blog is not there, but it's not pure D blog:

defenestrate.eu
defenestrate.eu/rss.html


If you can add an rss feed for specific categories he could just 
add that. I know he's done that for some of the planet D blogs.


I'd like to see yours included. It's good reading.


Re: dsource.org moved

2014-12-02 Thread Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d-announce

On Tuesday, 2 December 2014 at 23:02:32 UTC, Kiith-Sa wrote:
On Tuesday, 2 December 2014 at 22:20:29 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev 
wrote:

DSource in the headlines? In 2014? Shocking, I know.

Since Brad is no longer an active D user, and the website has 
had spotty uptime lately, I've offered to take over the 
hosting and any maintenance.


Although opinions exist that the site should simply be shut 
down, I think archiving it would be a better approach. The 
website has historical relevance to the D community, and might 
be required to get ancient D code running again. For example, 
we could make things read-only and make it obvious on every 
project page that we don't go to DSource any more. I can't 
exactly undertake a large redesign, but we can discuss our 
options.


Planet D (planet.dsource.org) is moved as well, and should 
continue to operate merrily. If your D blog's not there, let 
me know!


My blog is not there, but it's not pure D blog:

defenestrate.eu
defenestrate.eu/rss.html


Any way you can provide an RSS or ATOM feed for just the posts 
tagged D?


Re: dsource.org moved

2014-12-02 Thread Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d-announce

On 2014-12-02 23:20, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:

DSource in the headlines? In 2014? Shocking, I know.

Since Brad is no longer an active D user, and the website has had spotty
uptime lately, I've offered to take over the hosting and any maintenance.

Although opinions exist that the site should simply be shut down, I
think archiving it would be a better approach. The website has
historical relevance to the D community, and might be required to get
ancient D code running again. For example, we could make things
read-only and make it obvious on every project page that we don't go to
DSource any more. I can't exactly undertake a large redesign, but we
can discuss our options.


Could we put a banner (or similar) at the top of every page with some 
appropriate text as a warning?


--
/Jacob Carlborg