Re: GitHub migration complete

2016-11-01 Thread Marko Käning
On 01 Nov 2016, at 04:00 , Ryan Schmidt wrote: > We suggest that you move your user repository to your own GitHub account > where you can continue to use it as you see fit. Instructions for how to move > it are forthcoming. You should not use the Fork button to do so.

Re: GitHub migration complete

2016-10-31 Thread Ryan Schmidt
If you had a personal directory in the users directory of the Subversion repository, that has now been converted to a separate git repository in https://github.com/macports with a name starting with "macports-user-". We suggest that you move your user repository to your own GitHub account where

Re: GitHub migration complete

2016-10-31 Thread Marko Käning
On 31 Oct 2016, at 21:14 , Lawrence Velázquez wrote: >> On Oct 31, 2016, at 5:23 AM, Marko Käning wrote: >> >> a post-commit-hook checking whether the GitHub pull request ID #123 >> actually exists for the main repository seems like a valuable

Re: GitHub migration complete

2016-10-31 Thread Lawrence Velázquez
> On Oct 31, 2016, at 5:23 AM, Marko Käning wrote: > > a post-commit-hook checking whether the GitHub pull request ID #123 > actually exists for the main repository seems like a valuable feature, > especially in the transition phase. Shall I file a ticket on trac for it?

Re: GitHub migration complete

2016-10-31 Thread Lawrence Velázquez
> On Oct 31, 2016, at 1:16 PM, Thibaut Paumard wrote: > > Le 31/10/2016 à 17:23, Lawrence Velázquez a écrit : >>> On Oct 31, 2016, at 12:16 PM, Thibaut Paumard wrote: >>> Le 31/10/2016 à 17:01, René J.V. Bertin a écrit : > On Monday October

Re: GitHub migration complete

2016-10-31 Thread Thibaut Paumard
Le 31/10/2016 à 17:23, Lawrence Velázquez a écrit : >> On Oct 31, 2016, at 12:16 PM, Thibaut Paumard wrote: >> >>> Le 31/10/2016 à 17:01, René J.V. Bertin a écrit : On Monday October 31 2016 10:00:05 Ryan Schmidt wrote: This issue only affects the very small

Re: GitHub migration complete

2016-10-31 Thread Lawrence Velázquez
> On Oct 31, 2016, at 12:16 PM, Thibaut Paumard wrote: > >> Le 31/10/2016 à 17:01, René J.V. Bertin a écrit : >>> On Monday October 31 2016 10:00:05 Ryan Schmidt wrote: >>> >>> This issue only affects the very small percentage of the MacPorts user >>> population

Re: GitHub migration complete

2016-10-31 Thread Thibaut Paumard
Le 31/10/2016 à 17:01, René J.V. Bertin a écrit : > On Monday October 31 2016 10:00:05 Ryan Schmidt wrote: > >> This issue only affects the very small percentage of the MacPorts user >> population (including developers and maintainers) that clones the git >> repository. Most users will use the

Re: GitHub migration complete

2016-10-31 Thread René J . V . Bertin
On Monday October 31 2016 10:00:05 Ryan Schmidt wrote: > This issue only affects the very small percentage of the MacPorts user > population (including developers and maintainers) that clones the git > repository. Most users will use the rsync server, on which we do generate > portindexes for

Re: GitHub migration complete

2016-10-31 Thread Ryan Schmidt
> On Oct 31, 2016, at 4:18 AM, René J. V. Bertin wrote: > > Clemens Lang wrote: > >> If your question is not yet answered, ask on the mailing lists so it can >> be added. > > I may have overlooked this, but does github have any provisions that would > allow > the

Re: GitHub migration complete

2016-10-31 Thread Lawrence Velázquez
> On Oct 31, 2016, at 7:12 AM, René J.V. Bertin wrote: > >> On Monday October 31 2016 11:52:28 Rainer Müller wrote: >> >> rsync -vt >> rsync://rsync.macports.org/macports/release/ports/PortIndex_darwin_16_i386/PortIndex* >> $ports > > Thanks for the suggestion, I might

Re: GitHub migration complete

2016-10-31 Thread René J . V . Bertin
On Monday October 31 2016 11:52:28 Rainer Müller wrote: >Just as with Subversion. Yeah, I wouldn't expect that the SVC type had any influence on this. > rsync -vt > rsync://rsync.macports.org/macports/release/ports/PortIndex_darwin_16_i386/PortIndex* > $ports Thanks for the suggestion, I

Re: GitHub migration complete

2016-10-31 Thread Rainer Müller
On 2016-10-31 11:41, René J.V. Bertin wrote: > Pity though, the first-run portindex of a fresh git clone just took about 5 > quarters of an hour on one of my machines (a good 5s/port). Just as with Subversion. To speed it up, you could seed it with the latest generated version from rsync:

Re: GitHub migration complete

2016-10-31 Thread René J . V . Bertin
On Monday October 31 2016 10:49:55 Clemens Lang wrote: Hi, >Just as with Subversion, the answer is no. Remember that the PortIndex >is specific to the macOS version you are running, so a server-generated Ah, of course. I didn't actually know this but indeed port versions could be specific to

Re: GitHub migration complete

2016-10-31 Thread Clemens Lang
Hi, On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 10:18:42AM +0100, René J. V. Bertin wrote: > I may have overlooked this, but does github have any provisions that > would allow the PortIndex files to be generated on the server and > served with the actual repo contents? That would probably give a very > significant

Re: GitHub migration complete

2016-10-31 Thread Marko Käning
Hi Larry, On 31 Oct 2016, at 05:38 , Lawrence Velázquez wrote: > Old habits die hard, but from now on do NOT refer to Trac tickets as > "#12345" in your commit messages; GitHub's website interprets those as > pull request numbers. Copy and paste the full Trac URL instead. a

Re: GitHub migration complete

2016-10-31 Thread René J . V . Bertin
Lawrence Velázquez wrote: ... > $ git gc --aggressive FWIW, while theoretically very space-efficient, git's .git directories tend to grow to considerable size for active repositories. I find it useful to run the attached script from time to time. It runs the garbage collector, but also

Re: GitHub migration complete

2016-10-30 Thread Brandon Allbery
On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 12:38 AM, Lawrence Velázquez wrote: > Old habits die hard, but from now on do NOT refer to Trac tickets as > "#12345" in your commit messages; GitHub's website interprets those as > pull request numbers. Copy and paste the full Trac URL instead. >

Re: GitHub migration complete

2016-10-30 Thread Lawrence Velázquez
> On Oct 30, 2016, at 9:54 PM, Clemens Lang wrote: > > MacPorts developers should now have commit access to the GitHub > repositories. A quick reminder about commit messages: Old habits die hard, but from now on do NOT refer to Trac tickets as "#12345" in your commit

Re: GitHub migration complete

2016-10-30 Thread Lawrence Velázquez
> On Oct 30, 2016, at 9:54 PM, Clemens Lang wrote: > > Our Subversion repository has been split into several repositories on > GitHub. Please note that Ryan ran the svn2git conversion several times this weekend, so any clones made previously will have nothing in common with

Re: GitHub migration complete

2016-10-30 Thread Ryan Schmidt
> On Oct 30, 2016, at 10:28 PM, Carlo Tambuatco wrote: > > Is that mailto link macports-us...@lists.macosforge.org in the signature > still valid…? Yes, our previous mailing lists have not moved yet. And even when they do, the old addresses will remain valid.

GitHub migration complete

2016-10-30 Thread Clemens Lang
Good day MacPorts developers and users, We are pleased to announce that MacPorts has moved to GitHub. Our Subversion repository has been split into several repositories on GitHub . The buildbot, email notifications, and Trac are now triggered by changes made on GitHub. MacPorts developers