On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 2:39 AM, Chris Arndt <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 5 Nov., 04:37, Jorge Vargas <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 4:04 AM, Chris Arndt <[email protected]> wrote: >> > - Reclaim SVN repository? >> > - Migrate Trac and SVN to new server >> > - Separate tags/branches/trunk structure for TG1 and TG2 > >> I believe it was agreed some time ago we'll migrate to mercurial, why >> go back to svn? > > TG2 did the move. I don't suggest that TG2 move back to SVN, but I'am > against moving TG1 into hg anytime soon. > I think this is one of those cases where this should be in trunk.
> To be honest, I was never happy with the way the decision of migrating > TG2 to hg decision was made and I still don't see what advantages it > has brought. I'm sorry to heard that but everyone is very happy with it. just look at > On the contrary, there exists considerable confusion now > where the official repo is (do the 2.0 docs even mention the hg > repository?) and it is poorly maintained (e.g. missing tags for > official releases). > Just take a look at the number of people here that didn't had commit access in svn http://bitbucket.org/pedersen/tg_2_1_docs/descendants/ http://bitbucket.org/mramm/tg-21/descendants/ The reason why the move isn't finished is because we are waiting on an upgrade of the turbogers account to point hg.turbogears.org to it. Yet again another topic not for the main list. >> > - Revive turbogears-trunk and make distinction between users and >> > development mailing list clear. >> >> I do not think this need "reviving" simply a lot of discussion is >> currently happening on IRC. > > IRC is not an optimal medium for development discussion, IMHO. It is > not archived properly, unstructured and hard to search. Ideally, > development discussion and decisions should be documented in the docs > or the ticket system, but a mailing list is the next best thing. > It seems you all misinterpreted me on this, which probably means I didn't explained myself correctly. I'm not saying we are going to replace the ML with irc. I'm just saying a lot of discussion has happen on IRC which reduced the traffic of the ML. >> > - migration of TG Trac and SVN to dedicated server afterwards >> >> again why svn? > > See above. > >> > - Start discussion about the relationship of TG 1 and TG2 and the >> > (poor) maintenance state of the TG2 branch. >> >> The 2.1 branch has had a ton of commits recently and the 2.0 branch is >> in "maintenance mode" and 2.0.4 will come out only if a security >> release is needed. >> http://bitbucket.org/turbogears/tg-dev/http://bitbucket.org/turbogears/tgdevtools-dev/ >> andhttp://bitbucket.org/turbogears/tg-docs/ >> >> have had a ton of changesets. > > - The 2.0.3 release is STILL not listed on PyPI. yes, give me access to it and you will see it up thre in the next couple of minutes. > - There are more than 30 tickets pertaining to TG2 on the turbogears > trac, which have not had a milestone assigned and it looks like they > are not being attended to > See > http://trac.turbogears.org/query?status=!closed&group=version&milestone=&milestone=__unclassified__&order=priority > I mentioned this several times on the mailing list, but nothing I'm sorry we are all busy people. I started going over your list the first time you created it but I haven't had the time. I'l do my best to go over it but remember we are all volunteers here. > happens. > >> Are you still looking at the svn repository for this? > > No. > > > Chris > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TurboGears" 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?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
