3.2 seems quite different from 3.5. 3.2 refers to "the whiteboard", implying to me that there is a repo just for whiteboards. In 3.5 there would be no such repo.
I'm not going to vote on whiteboards, because I don't have a strong opinion on how they should be done. And therefore I'm not going to start a new poll on them. I was just trying to understand the various options. - Gordon -----Original Message----- From: omup...@gmail.com [mailto:omup...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Om Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 11:36 AM To: dev@flex.apache.org Subject: Re: [Git] repos open? On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Gordon Smith <gosm...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/docs/switching-to-git.html#user-name-spa > ces-for-branches > ? > > So are we adding a voting option 3.5? > > - Gordon > > Please feel free to add this option and send out a new poll. In that case, you should remove 3.2, since this would cover that as well. Thanks, Om > > -----Original Message----- > From: omup...@gmail.com [mailto:omup...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Om > Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 8:46 PM > To: dev@flex.apache.org > Subject: Re: [Git] repos open? > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 5:02 PM, Gordon Smith <gosm...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > Why can't each developer's whiteboard for flex-sdk be a branch in > > the flex-sdk repo? Is there some reason why dozens of branches are bad? > > > > > I believe this is what you mean: > > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/docs/switching-to-git.html#user-name-spa > ces-for-branches > ? > If we want to do this, we can ask Infra to help support this. > > > > If there is a single whiteboard repo, is it for flex-sdk, > > flex-falcon, or what? > > > > > If we go with the branch per user for each repo, we would have more > clarity. But that is not how the whiteboard in SVN was used. > > > > - Gordon > > > > > > Thanks, > Om > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: omup...@gmail.com [mailto:omup...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Om > > Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 2:04 PM > > To: dev@flex.apache.org > > Subject: Re: [Git] repos open? > > > > I am sorry, it is a bit confusing which 1 you are voting for. My > > bad for re-using numbers in a nested way. Can you be specific and > > vote for 3.1, etc. if you mean the options under 3? > > > > Thanks, > > Om > > > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Peter Ent <p...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > > > +1 for #1. Be good to figure out merge/conflict early in the game. > > > > > > Peter Ent > > > Flex SDK Team > > > Adobe Systems > > > > > > On 3/20/13 4:25 PM, "Alex Harui" <aha...@adobe.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >On 3/20/13 12:26 PM, "Om" <bigosma...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > >> Here is my proposal in the meantime: > > > >> > > > >> 1. We open up Falcon and ASJS repos first since there are no > > > >>issues with that > > > >+1. Peter and I probably have merge conflicts in ASJS which > > > >+would be a > > > >good > > > >testing ground since there isn't critical history in there. > > > >> 2. I have pinged Infra about the missing history in Utilities. > > > >>Let them come back to us with a definitive answer. > > > >+0. That's fine, but to me, it isn't worth the wait. Let's open > > > >+it up > > > >too. > > > >> 3. We need to figure out what to do about the whiteboard. The > > > >> current proposals to fix this problem are: > > > >> > > > >> 1. Use the sparse checkout option as described here > > > >> http://markmail.org/message/dg7hplezkzwiroes) > > > >> 2. Create a branch per user in the whiteboard > > > >> 3. Move to github for whiteboards > > > >> 4. Let whiteboards remain in SVN > > > >> > > > >I vote for #3 (isn't #1 dependent on #3?). IIRC, it wasn't > > > >horribly slow for Fred the second time he tried it. The 240MB in > > > >there isn't the biggest download I've seen. I think FB was larger. > > > > > > > >-- > > > >Alex Harui > > > >Flex SDK Team > > > >Adobe Systems, Inc. > > > >http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui > > > > > > > > > > > > >
