> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 7:14 AM, Christoph Zwerschke <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Mike, I suggested waiting with that until we have everything working at SF >> (including tickets). If it turns out we cannot use SF for tickets, we may >> consider moving the repositories elsewhere, or need to use our own server, >> so we should keep the bitbucket repos as reference until everything is >> really settled. > > I have normally agreed with you, but this time I think I must disagree. > Regardless of what happens with the SF migration, the change to git is > desirable. In addition, we've consolidated repositories, and managed to get > branching/etc properly established. The git repositories, unless we have an > actual problem, are only going to provide confusion (in much the same way > that the transfer of TG2.x from svn to hg did). > > So, unless we have an actual technical reason to keep the bb repositories > publicly available, I do want to take them offline ASAP.
I agree with Michael, having multiple repositories can only cause more chaos. Having consolidated and moved them to sf.net I would keep them only on sf.net Even though for any reason we won't end up using sf.net for tickets I would keep the repositories only there. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TurboGears Trunk" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/turbogears-trunk?hl=en.
