On Apr 24, 2012, at 9:07 AM, Adam Roben <aro...@webkit.org> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 11:06 AM, Jarred Nicholls <jar...@webkit.org> wrote: > (from correct address) > > On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 11:06 AM, Jarred Nicholls <jar...@sencha.com> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 11:02 AM, Simon Hausmann <simon.hausm...@nokia.com> > wrote: > On Wednesday, April 18, 2012 06:53:46 AM ext Shezan Baig wrote: > > Hi WebKit, > > > > I've been using a fork of the following repo: > > https://github.com/WebKit/webkit > > > > However, yesterday there was discussion on #webkit that the SHA-1 checksums > > on this repo are different from repo at git.webkit.org, which means folks > > working on both need to have both versions checked out. > > I believe the reason for them being different is because in the github repo > the > commit author fields are resolved. > > Yeah that's totally it. So svn.webkit.org => git.webkit.org => github would > need to be the mirroring strategy. Sounds dicey :) > > > I don't see what would be "dicey" about it. The svn.webkit.org -> > git.webkit.org step is the fragile one; after that it's just a simple "git > push" to get things over to GitHub. This sounds like a pretty good approach > to me, though of course it will cause some havoc for people who have already > been doing work using the current GitHub repository.
I was being facetious. The notion of chaining repos is always "fun" but technically you're right; it's as easy as a push, and that is more or less immune to errors i.e. if a push failed due to some network or server issue it would just push again the next commit and be back on track. > > -Adam >
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev