Hi Tom
Here are some comments on your thoughts (again, I'm no expert or authority).
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 5:07 PM, Tom Prince tom.pri...@ualberta.net wrote:
Although being able to comment on the diff inline is very convenient, my
experience is that this encourages looking at changes in a
On Jun 4, 2013, at 2:49 AM, tds...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
what about Bitbucket (www.bitbucket.org) and mercurial ?
Don't they provide the same features ?
I'm asking because we are in Python land. ;-)
BitBucket isn't as slick as GitHub.
Mercurial isn't as well known, and the storage
On 06/06/13 17:08, Jonathan Vanasco wrote:
the only downside to git, is that once something goes onto the
server... it's there for good. it's possible to rebase a repo back
to a specific commit , then replay without specific commits, and
push -f to overwrite the history... but if anyone
On Jun 6, 2013, at 12:52 PM, Phil Mayers wrote:
On 06/06/13 17:08, Jonathan Vanasco wrote:
the only downside to git, is that once something goes onto the
server... it's there for good. it's possible to rebase a repo back
to a specific commit , then replay without specific commits, and
Hi, just shiming in,
On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 09:55:19PM +0100, Terry Jones wrote:
So when the code is ready, the feature branch including any accumulated
commits (history) will
get merged - and not a clean diff against the main repo?
I'm very far from being a git expert. In fact, I'm kind
Hi,
what about Bitbucket (www.bitbucket.org) and mercurial ?
Don't they provide the same features ?
I'm asking because we are in Python land. ;-)
Regards,
Wolfgang
___
Twisted-Python mailing list
Twisted-Python@twistedmatrix.com
Thanks for working on this!
Here are the points where I can help:
1. We'd need some consensus (hence this message).
I am still new to Twisted and only sent a few patched, but I am
looking forward for sending reviews in GitHub or BitButcket, any or
them is better than the current read-only SVN
in general: +1 for this
Finally, my own minor concern: Github has no notion of a code review as a
unit of work. A pull request is just open until it is closed.
snip
I _think_ the following is true (if so, I find that strange) - pls correct me
if I'm wrong:
A pull request is not tied to a
The general workflow that's being described is:
- You open an issue for all bugs, enhancements, etc.
- When someone starts working on one of these, they create a branch (we
use descriptive branch names and put - at the end, with the issue
number).
- When the branch reaches the point where
Hi,
I think moving to github will be a huge win for the Twisted project,
and all the migration/integration issues are manageable.
I would recommend you keep two things in mind:
(1) I am a member of the FreeBSD project, and am mentoring a Google Summer
of Code student.
I pushed the
Terry,
thanks alot for your detailed explanation of a workflow. For me, that sounds
reasonable and workable.
At some point everyone who's interested will have contributed to the
discussion, to the code, and signed off. Then you merge it, using the web UI
So when the code is ready, the
On 2013-06-03 22:59, Glyph wrote:
Hi Twisted developers,
[..]
One suggestion that almost everybody made immediately was: we should use
Github for code reviews.
As mentioned on IRC, the only comment I have is about the lack of proper
e-mail addresses associated with commits. Tom is
Am 03.06.2013 22:59, schrieb Glyph:
Another objection is that Github is proprietary software, and an
externally-maintained service that we'd be depending upon.
One solution to the proprietary software thing is the availability of
the MIT-licensed http://gitlab.org. It's a largely
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Glyph gl...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
One suggestion that almost everybody made immediately was: we should use
Github for code reviews.
I'm +1 on the whole proposition as described.
Finally, my own minor concern: Github has no notion of a code review as a
Hi,
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 4:48 PM, Christopher Armstrong
ra...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Glyph gl...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
One suggestion that almost everybody made immediately was: we should use
Github for code reviews.
I'm +1 on the whole proposition as
On Jun 3, 2013, at 5:35 PM, Jamu Kakar jka...@kakar.ca wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 4:48 PM, Christopher Armstrong
ra...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Glyph gl...@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
One suggestion that almost everybody made immediately was: we should
Christian Kampka ch...@emerge-life.de writes:
Although gitlab is great for internal projects, this lack of a proper
support for public features makes it imo not that suitable for open
projects.
Sorry to butt in, but to add to this Gitlab doesn't support the fork
and pull request model of
I sent most of the below off-list to Glyph earlier, as my comments were a
bit half-assed and I'm not really (or not at all) a Twisted contributor.
Glyph suggested I mail them to the list anyway, and to try adding some more
concrete reasons for being +1 on the suggested change.
--- [ Original
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 8:48 PM, meejah mee...@meejah.ca wrote:
It sounds like aspects of this are currently in the latest stuff,
however, so it might work like github in this respect soon:
https://github.com/gitlabhq/gitlabhq/pull/3597
Whoah. Did anyone else notice that coveralls bot?
19 matches
Mail list logo
