svn connection issue

Hi all, Since subversion moved to breaburn.macports.org, I have had serious issues connecting. Here is the record: 1) Success r154111 2) A few minutes later while attempting to commit octave-image neptune:dports marius$ svn ci -m "octave-image: update to version 2.6.1." svn: E170013: Commit

Re: port:qt5 and (proposed) port:qt5-kde cohabitation

> On Oct 23, 2016, at 6:04 PM, Fred Wright wrote: > >> On Sun, 23 Oct 2016, Clemens Lang wrote: >> >>> On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 11:25:52AM +0200, René J.V. Bertin wrote: >>> >>> I noticed it for Trac (which isn't a complete improvement *). I'm not >>> aware that git allows

Re: port:qt5 and (proposed) port:qt5-kde cohabitation

On Sun, 23 Oct 2016, Clemens Lang wrote: > On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 11:25:52AM +0200, René J.V. Bertin wrote: > > > I noticed it for Trac (which isn't a complete improvement *). I'm not > > aware that git allows pulling only changes to a single subdirectory > > like svn does (svn up in a port dir.

For pixilla

HI Sorry to clutter the list but emails have bounced three times now (Host not found) trying to reply to pixilla: Bradley: Ticket is: https://trac.macports.org/ticket/52144 I don’t have a current diff either. Craig (Do you have another email address that I can try?)

Re: port:qt5 and (proposed) port:qt5-kde cohabitation

On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 08:00:25PM +0200, René J.V. Bertin wrote: > I meant my local copy evidently which I'll most like keep in > sources.conf and update from the new git working copy. If the svn > history is migrated to github I'll be able to delete the .svn > directory. Sorry, I was assuming

Re: port:qt5 and (proposed) port:qt5-kde cohabitation

On Sunday October 23 2016 18:20:06 Clemens Lang wrote: Hi, > > Thanks for the archive links. A quick scan suggests that my "shadow" > > tree I referred to will be a new working copy of the git repo, from > > where I'll filter things into the current svn tree. > > There will be no svn tree in a

Re: [154177] trunk/dports/python/py-spatialite

> On Oct 23, 2016, at 10:21 AM, vi...@macports.org wrote: > > Revision > 154177 > Author > vi...@macports.org > Date > 2016-10-23 17:21:28 +0200 (Sun, 23 Oct 2016) > Log Message > > py-spatialite: get rid of obsolete API “amalgamation” > Modified:

Re: port:qt5 and (proposed) port:qt5-kde cohabitation

Hi, On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 06:01:13PM +0200, René J.V. Bertin wrote: > Thanks for the archive links. A quick scan suggests that my "shadow" > tree I referred to will be a new working copy of the git repo, from > where I'll filter things into the current svn tree. There will be no svn tree in a

Re: port:qt5 and (proposed) port:qt5-kde cohabitation

On Sunday October 23 2016 17:43:56 Clemens Lang wrote: Thanks for the archive links. A quick scan suggests that my "shadow" tree I referred to will be a new working copy of the git repo, from where I'll filter things into the current svn tree. Will the migration conserve the full history? >

Re: port:qt5 and (proposed) port:qt5-kde cohabitation

Hi, On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 05:01:08PM +0200, René J.V. Bertin wrote: > Apparently not, were they sent on this ML? If so I must have applied > too strict filters (basically "don't send list messages and don't > filter copies sent to my own address" ...)

Re: port:qt5 and (proposed) port:qt5-kde cohabitation

On Sunday October 23 2016 16:04:07 Clemens Lang wrote: > Yes, SVN is being retired completely. Have you not read the announcement > emails? Apparently not, were they sent on this ML? If so I must have applied too strict filters (basically "don't send list messages and don't filter copies sent

Re: port:qt5 and (proposed) port:qt5-kde cohabitation

> On Oct 23, 2016, at 5:25 AM, René J.V. Bertin wrote: > >> On Sunday October 23 2016 02:21:02 Marko Käning wrote: >> >> I guess we can wait committing those once the new GitHub workflow is >> in place, because it would make reviewing all the changes much >> easier in a

Re: port:qt5 and (proposed) port:qt5-kde cohabitation

On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 11:25:52AM +0200, René J.V. Bertin wrote: > SVN is being retired completely? Yes, SVN is being retired completely. Have you not read the announcement emails? > I noticed it for Trac (which isn't a complete improvement *). I'm not > aware that git allows pulling only

Re: port:qt5 and (proposed) port:qt5-kde cohabitation

> On Oct 23, 2016, at 3:59 AM, Chris Jones wrote: > > So... you are saying you would take these collections, and instead of > grouping them together scatter them around in the other directories, > like 'science' etc., depending on what sort of functionality they >

Re: port:qt5 and (proposed) port:qt5-kde cohabitation

On Sunday October 23 2016 02:21:02 Marko Käning wrote: >> I should have another look at exactly how the mainstream *Qmake5* PortGroup >> interacts with port:qt5-kde . > >Could you investigate this further in the meantime? Done. There are some differences in the way port:qt5 and port:qt5-kde

Re: port:qt5 and (proposed) port:qt5-kde cohabitation

On Sunday October 23 2016 02:08:23 Marko Käning wrote: Hi, >just like all those port files belonging to KDE 3 and 4? > >We’re not opposed to do the latter, but it will be somewhat messier! "We" being Marko and I, but being the main (as in most active) maintainer I have a strong preference for

Re: port:qt5 and (proposed) port:qt5-kde cohabitation

On 23 Oct 2016, at 3:14 am, Lawrence Velázquez wrote: >> On Oct 22, 2016, at 8:08 PM, Marko Käning wrote: >> >> in the light of the upcoming commit of the new 'qt5-kde' port I want >> to ask (again) whether it would be acceptable, that we - for