Hi James! On Do, 23 Apr 2015, James McCoy wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 9:19 AM, Christian Brabandt <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi Daniel! > > > > On Do, 23 Apr 2015, Daniel Hahler wrote: > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> in the process of moving the repository to Github I suggest using the > >> existing mirror from https://github.com/vim-jp/vim as a starting > >> point. > > > > As a starting point for what? I think what is going to happen, is that > > the googlecode repository will be migrated into github (probably using > > the Export to Github button) > > Using that export mangles the history of the repository by, at > the very least, removing all traces of the .hgtags file. This > means that there will be no shared history between > https://github.com/vim/vim and any existing Git mirror (e.g., > vim-jp's mirror, my mirror, MacVim's mirror, etc.). This also > means that any Mercurial mirror of the Git mirror won't have the > same history as the existing Mercurial repository. That is the first time I hear about problems with the existing experimental github's Vim mirror. Wouldn't there then also be a problem with the repository cleanup script? > If there's a desire to change the contents of the repository, > that should simply be done after the conversion to Git, instead > of changing published history. > > > and then development will continue from > > there one. This has the advantage, that the issues will be migrated as > > well. > > That's a high cost just to get issues migrated. Is it possible to > only migrate issues or disable the mangling of the repository's > history? I don't know. Bram might know and I think he is still waiting for some technical feedback from the Google guys, so he could ask there then how to prevent mangling the history. > >> This would make it easier for existing patches / pull requests (based > >> on this AFAIK most popular Git mirror) to get integrated into Vim > >> itself later, because of the then common history. > >> > >> Additionally it would make it easier/trivial for users that are using > >> this mirror to migrate to Vim's new repository. > > > > If I am not mistaken, it's simply a matter of adding another remote to > > your .git/config file. What would be the problem with that? > > If people are just going to rebase their patches, then there's no > problem. If instead they want to merge future Vim development into > their existing branches, then the lack of a shared history is a > problem. Let's get some numbers here would be helpful. Can people here, who rely on that please speak up? I mean, how many people are tracking patches like this? And perhaps the vim-jp community could tell if this would be a problem for them? Best, Christian -- Steht der Bauer im Gemüse, hat er später grüne Füße. -- -- You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vim_dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
