On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 22:37:56 -0700, Daniel Friesen
li...@nadir-seen-fire.com wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jul 2012 21:35:00 -0700, Roan Kattouw
roan.katt...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 9:30 PM, Subramanya Sastry
ssas...@wikimedia.org wrote:
(b) Commit amends hide evolution of an idea and
Perhaps its is possible and much simplier to write a kind of
gateway/interface framework
between the old svn codereview tool, which gives comitters and reviewers
the
/_look and feel of the old cr tools_/
but accesses the present repo on GitHub.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital
Hi,
Given that we are going to use labsconsole wiki (which is later going
to be renamed to wikitech) as a documentation base for various
software and server documentation, we should propose a way how this
new documentation base is going to be organized.
I would prefer to create new namespace
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Meghan Mahar meghan.ma...@appian.comwrote:
I currently have a set of internal users for our wiki that have
Administrator access. I also have a set of external users (our customers)
that can only read pages and create discussion pages.
I would like to remove
Unfortunately for your case, read access to the wiki grants permission to
both
current and old revisions -- it's simply assumed throughout the system. I
don't
think there's really a good way to actually prevent access to old
revisions.
You might be able to track down all the output systems and
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Brion Vibber br...@pobox.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Meghan Mahar meghan.ma...@appian.com
wrote:
Unfortunately for your case, read access to the wiki grants permission to
both current and old revisions -- it's simply assumed throughout the
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 10:34 AM, Andrew Garrett agarr...@wikimedia.orgwrote:
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Brion Vibber br...@pobox.com wrote:
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Meghan Mahar meghan.ma...@appian.com
wrote:
Unfortunately for your case, read access to the wiki grants
. and of course I've copied other people's pronouns without looking at
the name of the person I'm speaking to. For He, read She. My apologies.
Yeah... sorry about that earlier. I usually don't pay much attention to the
names. I look at the first and last letter of the name to identify their
On Jul 18, 2012, at 9:35 PM, Roan Kattouw wrote:
On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 9:30 PM, Subramanya Sastry
ssas...@wikimedia.org wrote:
(b) Commit amends hide evolution of an idea and the tradeoffs and
considerations that went into development of something -- the reviews are
all separate from git
Given that we are going to use labsconsole wiki (which is later going
to be renamed to wikitech) as a documentation base for various
software and server documentation, we should propose a way how this
new documentation base is going to be organized.
I would prefer to create new namespace
[1] branch-review model, as in, a model where a review is about a
topic-branch, whether it contains 1 commit, or many. Or even a branch from a
fork. In other words the pull-request model from GitHub. And yes, on GitHub
one can also create a pull-request from one branch to another, within the same
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Rob Lanphier ro...@wikimedia.org wrote:
It would appear from reading this page that the only alternative to
Gerrit that has a serious following is GitHub. Is that the case?
Personally, it seems like Phabricator or Barkeep has the best chance
of dislodging
* It's a Ruby on Rails codebase with lots of gem dependencies and a
reputation for being hard to install (haven't tried it).
I can vouch for this in a limited fashion, I spent around an hour one
day trying to get it working, and gave up. This has been my experience
with 90% of Ruby projects,
On Thu, 19 Jul 2012 11:58:54 -0700, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org
wrote:
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Rob Lanphier ro...@wikimedia.org
wrote:
It would appear from reading this page that the only alternative to
Gerrit that has a serious following is GitHub. Is that the case?
Around 21:30UTC automatic redirection to the mobile version of *.
wikimedia.org sites hosted on the cluster (except for commons) was enabled
with the deployment of https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/16000/. This is
part of the ongoing effort by the mobile team to provide automatic
redirection for
PS big thanks to Asher Feldman for getting the change compiled and deployed.
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 4:34 PM, Arthur Richards aricha...@wikimedia.orgwrote:
Around 21:30UTC automatic redirection to the mobile version of *.
wikimedia.org sites hosted on the cluster (except for commons) was
+1 to Subramanya.
Roan Kattouw wrote:
Although squashing and amending has downsides, there is also an
advantage: now that Jenkins is set up properly for mediawiki/core.git
, we will never put commits in master that don't pass the tests. With
the fixup commit model, intermediate commits often
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 4:40 PM, Platonides platoni...@gmail.com wrote:
It should be possible to only bisect on the left-branch of merges. If
git doesn't have such feature, it should be added. In fact, it's very
likely that it's what it uses when start and end are in the same line,
but as the
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 11:58 AM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote:
What are people's experiences with Gitorious? Does it seem
sufficiently hackable to perhaps meet our needs, or does it have too
many architectural flaws to be worthwhile?
Here are a few things I've been able to find out
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 6:29 PM, Roan Kattouw roan.katt...@gmail.com wrote:
gitlab is an open source clone of GitHub (which means you can
self-host it)
Forgot to say: thanks to Timo for bringing gitlab to my attention.
Roan
___
Wikitech-l mailing
From what I can tell, we have essentially three choices:
* Continue to work with the heavily centralized and clunky Gerrit
workflow, and try to beat it into shape to not cause us too much pain,
while seeing people increasingly move into GitHub for doing
experimental projects. Hope for
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 06:29:58PM -0700, Roan Kattouw wrote:
gitlab might be this, but it's written in Ruby so presumably our
developer community would be less able to contribute to it. And I'm
pretty sure ops is not just gonna say sure, no problem if/when we
ask them to deploy a Ruby web app
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 11:58:54AM -0700, Erik Moeller wrote:
From what I can tell, we have essentially three choices:
* Continue to work with the heavily centralized and clunky Gerrit
workflow, and try to beat it into shape to not cause us too much pain,
while seeing people increasingly
23 matches
Mail list logo
