Re: GitHub migration

One major improvement I've seen is that when there's a small issue in a commit (such a typo) a contributor often leaves an inline comment and it can get fixed directly. This is a great workflow for simple issues. Alex On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Aymeric Augustin <

Re: GitHub migration

Hello, Django's development moved to GitHub 7 months ago, and it's a success! No guidelines for pull requests were published, but usage patterns have emerged. Here's what I've observed. 550 pull requests have been opened: - 20% of them are still open. This figure is a slightly above

Re: GitHub migration done!

Hi Charles, > I setup a new mirror using hg-git: > >  https://bitbucket.org/django/django-hg-git > > I work for Bitbucket and I'll make sure the mirror is maintained. Thanks very much for doing this. Regards, Vinay Sajip -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google

Re: GitHub migration done!

On Apr 30, 6:19 pm, Carl Meyer wrote: > Hi Vinay, > > On 04/30/2012 07:11 PM, Vinay Sajip wrote: > > > On Apr 28, 4:08 am, Adrian Holovaty  wrote: > > >> * We're going to keep the Subversion repository around indefinitely, > >> but it'll no longer be

Re: GitHub migration done!

On May 1, 5:39 pm, Carl Meyer wrote: > It's just a cron job and a local repo using hgsubversion; every five > minutes it pulls the latest from Subversion and pushes it to Bitbucket. > The repo and cron job are hosted on the djangoproject.com server. If you > are able to get the

Re: GitHub migration done!

On 05/02/2012 10:09 AM, Cal Leeming [Simplicity Media Ltd] wrote: Apologies if this question has already been answered or seems silly but - is there a reason Mercurial is needed?? Can contributors not just switch to using git? i.e. if we have deprecated SVN, then why isn't Mercurial also being

Re: GitHub migration done!

On May 1, 5:39 pm, Carl Meyer wrote: > It's just a cron job and a local repo using hgsubversion; every five > minutes it pulls the latest from Subversion and pushes it to Bitbucket. > The repo and cron job are hosted on the djangoproject.com server. If you > are able to get

Re: GitHub migration done!

Apologies if this question has already been answered or seems silly but - is there a reason Mercurial is needed?? Can contributors not just switch to using git? i.e. if we have deprecated SVN, then why isn't Mercurial also being deprecated?? Cal On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Florian Apolloner

Re: GitHub migration done!

On Wednesday, May 2, 2012 3:37:07 PM UTC+2, Florian Apolloner wrote: > > Far from easy, last time (or actually times) I tried to use it it broke in > many horrible ways :( [And either the link isn't listing an up2date project > or it's really dead since 3 years] > Ignore the dead status, I

Re: GitHub migration done!

On Tuesday, May 1, 2012 6:40:53 PM UTC+2, dstufft wrote: > > Pretty sure this isn't going to make a compatible with the existing > mirror > mirror but http://hg-git.github.com/ should make it easy to go from git > -> hg. > Far from easy, last time (or actually times) I tried to use it it

Re: GitHub migration done!

Pretty sure this isn't going to make a compatible with the existing mirror mirror but http://hg-git.github.com/ should make it easy to go from git -> hg. On Tuesday, May 1, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Carl Meyer wrote: > On 05/01/2012 12:45 AM, Vinay Sajip wrote: > > On May 1, 2:19 am, Carl

Re: GitHub migration done!

On 05/01/2012 12:45 AM, Vinay Sajip wrote: On May 1, 2:19 am, Carl Meyer wrote: Good point. I think which of those happens now depends on whether a motivated someone steps up to figure out how to convert the mirror to use hg-git and source from Git, and then maintain it as

Re: GitHub migration done!

Hi all, On Saturday, April 28, 2012 5:08:09 AM UTC+2, Adrian Holovaty wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Adrian Holovaty wrote: > > We're going to do the migration to GitHub today. This means we'll no > > longer be committing code to our Subversion repository. Committers, > > please

Re: GitHub migration done!

On May 1, 2:19 am, Carl Meyer wrote: > > Good point. I think which of those happens now depends on whether a > motivated someone steps up to figure out how to convert the mirror to > use hg-git and source from Git, and then maintain it as needed. I > originally did the current

Re: GitHub migration done!

On Apr 28, 4:08 am, Adrian Holovaty wrote: > * We're going to keep the Subversion repository around indefinitely, > but it'll no longer be updated. That means that any mirrors using that repository as a source are also not worth using any more. There's the official

Re: GitHub migration done!

Adrian, excellent job and thank you! Curious what five open-source on Subversion you are referring to? -Original Message- From: Adrian Holovaty Sent: Friday, April 27, 2012 11:08 PM To: django-developers@googlegroups.com Subject: GitHub migration done! On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:50

Re: GitHub migration done!

On Saturday, April 28, 2012 12:46:53 PM UTC-7, Yuval Adam wrote: > > I think this issue should be dealt with sooner rather than later. > > Django will start getting lots of orphan pull requests with no > matching trac ticket, and a policy of how community members should > contribute via

Re: GitHub migration done!

I wrote a little userscript that linkifies ticket numbers in github pull request to the correct trac ticket. It can be found here . Le vendredi 27 avril 2012 23:08:09 UTC-4, Adrian Holovaty a écrit : > > On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Adrian Holovaty

Re: GitHub migration done!

On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 10:08 PM, Adrian Holovaty wrote: > OK, it's live! > > https://github.com/django/django Hi all, I've written a post-mortem here, for anybody interested in how the process went: http://www.holovaty.com/writing/django-github/ Adrian -- You received

Re: GitHub migration done!

Hey Aymeric, Just throwing in my 2 cents. If there's a public thread I can follow re: this issue, I'd appreciate a link, since I haven't been able to find it. Waiting patiently :) - Yuval On Apr 29, 12:36 am, Aymeric Augustin wrote: > On 28 avr. 2012, at

Re: GitHub migration done!

On 28 avr. 2012, at 21:46, Yuval Adam wrote: > I think this issue should be dealt with sooner rather than later. > > Django will start getting lots of orphan pull requests with no > matching trac ticket, and a policy of how community members should > contribute via github should be in place. >

Re: GitHub migration done!

I think this issue should be dealt with sooner rather than later. Django will start getting lots of orphan pull requests with no matching trac ticket, and a policy of how community members should contribute via github should be in place. As a side note, it is kind of a hassle to submit a pull

Re: GitHub migration done!

Amazing news!! Great job, Adrian. Cal On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 4:08 AM, Adrian Holovaty wrote: > On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Adrian Holovaty > wrote: > > We're going to do the migration to GitHub today. This means we'll no > > longer be committing

Re: GitHub migration done!

Could you make tags out of stable releases. It would help a lot :} -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/django-developers/-/NzF2b8Xl9wUJ. To post to this

Re: GitHub migration done!

On Saturday, April 28, 2012 at 5:17 AM, slav0nic wrote: > what about "Browse Source", trac links to changset, CommitTicketUpdater ? > Maybe this will be possible only if you syncing github to local copy via > pulling. Yup, I'm working on that. I didn't get it done yesterday, but didn't want to

Re: GitHub migration done!

On Saturday, April 28, 2012 5:08:09 AM UTC+2, Adrian Holovaty wrote: > > OK, it's live! > https://github.com/django/django > Great news! Therefore probably you should update this site: https://www.djangoproject.com/download/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the

Re: GitHub migration done!

Great job! 在 2012年4月28日星期六UTC+8上午11时08分09秒，Adrian Holovaty写道： > > On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Adrian Holovaty > wrote: > > We're going to do the migration to GitHub today. This means we'll no > > longer be committing code to our Subversion repository. Committers,

Re: GitHub migration done!

what about "Browse Source", trac links to changset, CommitTicketUpdater ? Maybe this will be possible only if you syncing github to local copy via pulling. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To view this discussion on the web

Re: GitHub migration done!

Awesome job guys! Vitaly Babiy On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 9:07 AM, Camilo Nova wrote: > Great Job. This will make easier for a lot of people to be involved on the > project. > > > On Friday, April 27, 2012 10:08:09 PM UTC-5, Adrian Holovaty wrote: >> >> On Fri, Apr 27,

Re: GitHub migration done!

Great Job. This will make easier for a lot of people to be involved on the project. On Friday, April 27, 2012 10:08:09 PM UTC-5, Adrian Holovaty wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Adrian Holovaty > wrote: > > We're going to do the migration to GitHub today. This

Re: GitHub migration done!

Congrats Adrian, this is very exciting news! I'm excited to see Django taking the next leap forward, exciting times ahead! Cheers! -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To view this discussion on the web visit

Re: GitHub migration done!

On 28 avr. 2012, at 05:08, Adrian Holovaty wrote: > * We're going to keep using Trac for tickets, but pull requests on > GitHub are also welcome. Hi everyone, For extra safety, I recommend you still create Trac tickets for each suggested change, until we work out how pull requests integrate

Re: GitHub migration done!

Adrian, Thank you. Well done. Awesome. :-) On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:08 PM, Adrian Holovaty wrote: > On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Adrian Holovaty wrote: >> We're going to do the migration to GitHub today. This means we'll no >> longer be

GitHub migration done!

On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Adrian Holovaty wrote: > We're going to do the migration to GitHub today. This means we'll no > longer be committing code to our Subversion repository. Committers, > please hold off on making commits until the migration is done. OK, it's

Re: GitHub migration

Wow this is awesome! Congrats on the change! Very excited to be able to contribute a Pull Request or two! On Friday, April 27, 2012 9:50:01 AM UTC-7, Adrian Holovaty wrote: > > Hey guys, here's an important heads-up! > > We're going to do the migration to GitHub today. This means we'll no >

Re: GitHub migration

On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Adrian Holovaty wrote: > We're going to do the migration to GitHub today. This means we'll no > longer be committing code to our Subversion repository. Committers, > please hold off on making commits until the migration is done. > > I expect

Re: GitHub migration

woohoo! this is great, good luck Adrian Brendan Smith, IT Specialist National Priorities Project http://www.nationalpriorities.org http://www.facebook.com/nationalpriorities 413 584 9556 On Apr 27, 2012, at 12:50 PM, Adrian Holovaty wrote: > Hey guys, here's an important heads-up! > >

GitHub migration

Hey guys, here's an important heads-up! We're going to do the migration to GitHub today. This means we'll no longer be committing code to our Subversion repository. Committers, please hold off on making commits until the migration is done. I expect it'll be done by late afternoon Chicago time.

Re: GitHub migration planning

if trac maintain is paiful maybe this link can be helpful CommercialServices – The Trac Project -> http://trac.edgewall.org/wiki/CommercialServices در ۲۴ آوریل ۲۰۱۲، ساعت ۲۰:۲۲، Aaron C. de Bruyn نوشته: > On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 22:30, Tai Lee

Re: GitHub migration planning

On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 22:30, Tai Lee wrote: > This seems odd to me. Django is generally a very open and community oriented > project, which strives to consult with the community and achieve a > consensus, resorting to a BDFL decision when necessary, after all sides

Re: GitHub migration planning

Hi, On Tuesday, April 24, 2012 7:30:05 AM UTC+2, Tai Lee wrote: > I just remember Adrian basically saying (and I'm paraphrasing here): "I've > been away too long, but I'm back now and I've decided that we're moving to > GitHub!" > I had that feeling a bit myself, but I think there have been

Re: GitHub migration planning

On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 17:30, Tai Lee wrote: > This seems odd to me. [...] > I don't remember a thread started by Django core letting the community know > that a move was seriously on the cards, and giving the community a chance to > have some formal input before a

Re: GitHub migration planning

This seems odd to me. Django is generally a very open and community oriented project, which strives to consult with the community and achieve a consensus, resorting to a BDFL decision when necessary, after all sides have put their case. Maybe I wasn't following closely enough (apologies if

Re: GitHub migration planning

Thanks Luke for the clarification. -Original Message- From: Luke Plant Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2012 8:52 AM To: django-developers@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: GitHub migration planning On 20/04/12 19:58, Daniel Sokolowski wrote: Was BitBucket (mercurial system which is python

Re: GitHub migration planning

On 20/04/12 19:58, Daniel Sokolowski wrote: > Was BitBucket (mercurial system which is python based) not considered? > And could someone point me to a url where I can read the discussion on > this migration; I am rather curious why it’s happening – the current > system works so I see no reason to

Re: GitHub migration planning

On 20/04/12 18:26, Max Thayer wrote: > Luke, maybe I don't understand something about Trac, but some of the > issues raised by you or those you quoted seem easily fixed. Consider: > > "- there isn't a notion of "component", so there's no way to ask > "give me > the list of all

Re: GitHub migration planning

Thank you Alex and Max for your responses. -Original Message- From: Alex Ogier Sent: Friday, April 20, 2012 3:15 PM To: django-developers@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: GitHub migration planning On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 2:58 PM, Daniel Sokolowski <daniel.sokolow...@klinsight.com>

Re: GitHub migration planning

On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 2:58 PM, Daniel Sokolowski wrote: > Was BitBucket (mercurial system which is python based) not considered? And > could someone point me to a url where I can read the discussion on this > migration; I am rather curious why it’s happening –

Re: GitHub migration planning

Paul, I meant no offense. I should have been more clear that I meant my question to explore what makes Trac ideal for Django. My apologies for any misunderstandings. Daniel: Indeed, BitBucket was considered. There's a thread about it from pretty recently here:

Re: GitHub migration planning

, 2012 1:26 PM To: django-developers@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: GitHub migration planning Luke, maybe I don't understand something about Trac, but some of the issues raised by you or those you quoted seem easily fixed. Consider: "- there isn't a notion of "component", so

Re: GitHub migration planning

Max, and others on this thread, Arguing about the specific mechanics of how github issues work isn't productive. Put very plainly: Django will not move to github issues because they cannot support our open community triage process. This is not negotiable. Regards, -Paul -- You received this

Re: GitHub migration planning

Luke, maybe I don't understand something about Trac, but some of the issues raised by you or those you quoted seem easily fixed. Consider: "- there isn't a notion of "component", so there's no way to ask "give me > the list of all contrib.auth tickets, so I can find the duplicate > quickly";"

Re: GitHub migration planning

On 18/04/12 22:44, philipn wrote: > Hey folks! > > I started a wiki page to help plan a migration to GitHub: > > https://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/GitHub%20Migration > > I don't know what I'm doing, but I do know that the current Trac setup > (attaching patches, etc) is less accessible to

Re: GitHub migration planning

On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 1:15 PM, philipn wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, April 18, 2012 5:26:27 PM UTC-7, dstufft wrote: >> >> Github issues do not have the ability for anyone to close, tag, or create >> milestones. You have to be the creator of the ticket or someone with >>

Re: GitHub migration planning

On Wednesday, April 18, 2012 5:26:27 PM UTC-7, dstufft wrote: > > Github issues do not have the ability for anyone to close, tag, or create > milestones. You have to be the creator of the ticket or someone with > commit access. Django's track instance allows anyone to participate > in this way

Re: GitHub migration planning

Em 18 de abril de 2012 21:13, Luke Granger-Brown escreveu: > > On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 11:55 PM, Dalton Barreto > wrote: >> >> Em 18 de abril de 2012 19:46, Dalton Barreto >> escreveu: >> > Em 18 de abril de 2012 18:44, philipn

Re: GitHub migration planning

Github issues do not have the ability for anyone to close, tag, or create milestones. You have to be the creator of the ticket or someone with commit access. Django's track instance allows anyone to participate in this way and is one of the major reasons to my knowledge that Django will keep it's

Re: GitHub migration planning

On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 11:55 PM, Dalton Barreto wrote: > Em 18 de abril de 2012 19:46, Dalton Barreto > escreveu: > > Em 18 de abril de 2012 18:44, philipn escreveu: > > Hmm, this would probably disable pull requests too. Not a

Re: GitHub migration planning

On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 6:55 PM, Dalton Barreto wrote: >> Maybe the best way to avoid that people create issues on github is to >> disable it for the >> official repository. This is possible through the Github's Admin interface. >> > > Hmm, this would probably disable pull

Re: GitHub migration planning

On 19 April 2012 00:55, Donald Stufft wrote: > Github Issues are not flexible enough for Django. > That's rather a vague statement. Github issues are actually more *flexible* then Trac as you can define any set of tags for an issue. What Django could possibly want to

Re: GitHub migration planning

Em 18 de abril de 2012 19:46, Dalton Barreto escreveu: > Em 18 de abril de 2012 18:44, philipn escreveu: >> Hey folks! >> >> I started a wiki page to help plan a migration to GitHub: >> >> https://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/GitHub%20Migration >> >> I

Re: GitHub migration planning

Github Issues are not flexible enough for Django. On Wednesday, April 18, 2012 at 6:53 PM, Alex Ogier wrote: > On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 6:46 PM, Dalton Barreto (mailto:daltonma...@gmail.com)> wrote: > > Em 18 de abril de 2012 18:44, philipn >

Re: GitHub migration planning

On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 6:46 PM, Dalton Barreto wrote: > Em 18 de abril de 2012 18:44, philipn escreveu: >> Hey folks! >> >> I started a wiki page to help plan a migration to GitHub: >> >> https://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/GitHub%20Migration >> >> I

Re: GitHub migration planning

Em 18 de abril de 2012 18:44, philipn escreveu: > Hey folks! > > I started a wiki page to help plan a migration to GitHub: > > https://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/GitHub%20Migration > > I don't know what I'm doing, but I do know that the current Trac setup > (attaching patches,

GitHub migration planning

Hey folks! I started a wiki page to help plan a migration to GitHub: https://code.djangoproject.com/wiki/GitHub%20Migration I don't know what I'm doing, but I do know that the current Trac setup (attaching patches, etc) is less accessible to non-core contributors than GitHub and I'd love to