I like the idea but I'm not sure how you'd go about setting something like
that up. How would you ensure both repositories are kept in sync? The
usual method as I understand it is to have one repository as the master and
the rest as mirrors but this doesn't allow you to commit to the mirrors
When the subject came up on IRC last week, I went ahead and registered the
organization OpenIndiana on Github. Whether it goes under that organization,
or as a team under the Illumos organization, makes no difference to me.
-M
On Feb 12, 2012, at 9:49 AM, Andrew Stormont wrote:
Hi all,
At
Hi Andrew,
Andrew Stormont píše v ne 12. 02. 2012 v 14:49 +:
Hi all,
At the Illumos meetup in Brussels it was proposed that we migrate
illumos-userland to GitHub. There were several good reasons for
making the switch but the two main ones were: git is faster (because
most of it is
Andy,
I'd think we could use the same tools that illumos uses to mirror from
their authoritative repo to BitBucket and GitHub. I'd expect there are two
non-exclusive ways to approach mirroring: you can add hooks to the
canonical repo that cause it to push to the DVCS hubs as part of the
commit,
2012/2/12 Andrew Stormont andyjstorm...@gmail.com
On 12/02/2012 16:06, Milan Jurik milan.ju...@xylab.cz wrote:
And about familiarity - shouldn't it be more about usability/simplicity?
Hi,
Hopefully this will answer your questions http://whygitisbetterthanx.com/#
Avert your eyes,
From: Bayard Bell buffer.g.overf...@gmail.com
Reply-To: OpenIndiana Developer mailing list oi-dev@openindiana.org
Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2012 17:20:33 +
To: OpenIndiana Developer mailing list oi-dev@openindiana.org
Subject: Re: [oi-dev] Lets talk about Git
2012/2/12 Andrew Stormont
Hi,
Andrew Stormont píše v ne 12. 02. 2012 v 17:13 +:
On 12/02/2012 16:06, Milan Jurik milan.ju...@xylab.cz wrote:
Hi Andrew,
Andrew Stormont píše v ne 12. 02. 2012 v 14:49 +:
Hi all,
At the Illumos meetup in Brussels it was proposed that we migrate
illumos-userland
On 02/12/12 09:29 AM, Milan Jurik wrote:
Btw. how is status of cadmium features on git? Like recommit?
git rebase is far more powerful useful than cadmium recommit,
especially once you learn git rebase --interactive.
The cadmium features that are missing from git are the ones more
specific
Hi Alan,
Alan Coopersmith píše v ne 12. 02. 2012 v 10:01 -0800:
On 02/12/12 09:29 AM, Milan Jurik wrote:
Btw. how is status of cadmium features on git? Like recommit?
git rebase is far more powerful useful than cadmium recommit,
especially once you learn git rebase --interactive.
I
richlowe's been working on both, but neither are in use with OI.
My preference for all of this functionality would be to have the validation
done by the pull request. Webrevs could be generated automatically, and the
applicable nits would give feedback requesting either that they be resolved
for
Well I guess if we were to slightly modify the new integration process we
discussed at Brussels we could achieve this quite easily:
Developer pushes to Bit Bucket or Git Hub - Changeset is intercepted and
passed to Jenkins for testing - Build completes successfully and changeset
is pushed to
Sounds about right to me. The other bits we'd need to sort out as per
Brussels is some kind of permissioning for established contributors. This
would be something like being granted the Developer role for
illumos-userland in Redmine and providing the same ssh key both for your
Redmine registration
Hi,
regarding the git vs mercurial part I have one suggestion. There is a project,
which enables pushing using mercurial client into git repositories. Project is
called hg-git (http://hg-git.github.com/). One has to install it and enable it
in hgrc. After he has done one, he can commit to git
Agenda:
1) new userland mailgroup/repo/project go-live
2) follow-up on gcc discussion
3) openssl-1.0.0 update
4) contribution process and workflow
5) git parity
I expect this will be enough to keep us busy for a full meeting and perhaps
then some, but if there are other items people would like
On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 21:17, Bayard Bell buffer.g.overf...@gmail.com wrote:
[...] Also, I'd appreciate if someone could point me to the meeting
bot documentation, as I'm completely unaware of how to operate it.
I found this link on the page regarding meetings on the OI wiki :)
On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 2:50 PM, Josef 'Jeff' Sipek
jef...@josefsipek.netwrote:
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 07:53:09PM +, Bayard Bell wrote:
I know that jeffpc mentioned having a patch for issues with an earlier
version, but it wasn't attached to the issue. I don't know, either, if
it's
On Sun, Feb 12, 2012 at 15:49, Andrew Stormont andyjstorm...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
At the Illumos meetup in Brussels it was proposed that we migrate
illumos-userland to GitHub. There were several good reasons for making the
switch but the two main ones were: git is faster (because most of
I had a chance to talk to some people from the user community at the
conference, and a lot of them seemed a bit skittish about getting involved
in development. The model I talked about with them is creating nuclea about
product areas like LAMP, dynamic language, media players. Let users talk
about
Thanks for the write-up and diagram, Jeppe.
I don't think the idea is that trusted means that a commit goes right to
the repo: I think trusted means if it clears CI, it's good to go. Everyone
else has to have eyeballs and peer review. Maybe core people can do manual
pushes straight to the repo,
Hello,
I have tried to package xz. The package can be compiled without any problems
with SFE gcc. It was reported to also work with gcc 4.4. Therefore, I would
like to have Makefile reviewed.
I would also like to test the build process on sparc architectures. However, I
am without access to
easy to fix it by one line to you *.p5m file on top:
transform file path=usr.*/man/.+ - default mangler.man.stability
volatile
-Igor
On 2/13/12 3:31 AM, Adam Števko adam.ste...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I have tried to package xz. The package can be compiled without any
problems with SFE gcc. It
21 matches
Mail list logo
