Hi Igor,
Yes, I think everything is good to go now
Mike
so are we good to go now import-wise?
-igor
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 7:13 PM, Michael O'Cleirigh
<[email protected]> wrote:
I was able to add in a remote to the wicketstuff-core-1.4 branch from the
first import and then use git cherry-pick to pull in each of the 11 commits
that had occurred since the 1.4.14 release tag was applied.
I've pushed my changes into the wicketstuff/core repository. This should
build the 1.4.15-SNAPSHOT version.
Once we have everything finalized and announced I will cut the 1.4.15
release and update the core-1.4.x branch to track 1.4.16-SNAPSHOT
Since about 1.4.10 I have been creating branches for each stable
wicketstuff-core release for the 1.4.stable.x point releases. Those weren't
preserved as branches but I think the tags will be sufficient.
I might try a new approach that follows how git is showing the historical
releases in that each release will get a tag and for the stable branch that
tracks the non snapshot wicket release it would move forward from release to
release.
Actually the build just failed with push-timer complaining about java6
ism's.
Mike
i was able to restore it off the 1.4.14 release tag. hopefully there
havent been commits in the interim.
-igor
2010/12/29 Major Péter<[email protected]>:
I think the wicketstuff-core-1.4 branch got lost, the core project now
only
has the 1.5-SNAPSHOT stuff, at least that branch should be restored IMHO.
Thanks,
Peter
2010-12-29 22:50 keltezéssel, Igor Vaynberg írta:
i think i got them split. core is already pushed, sandbox is incoming.
we lost branches in the process, i dont think this is a big deal since
they were mostly used as tags to mark releases. on the other hand i
converted release branches to tags before i did the split, and those
seemed to stick around - so maybe we havent lost anything at all.
-igor
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 1:43 PM, Martijn Dashorst
<[email protected]> wrote:
Great, I won't be of much help as I left my laptop at work due to a
mishap with my car (apparent broken battery) and needing to entertain
the AAA guy.
Martijn
On Wednesday, December 29, 2010, Igor Vaynberg<[email protected]>
wrote:
i will play around with splitting and we can see what happens
-igor
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 10:04 AM, James Carman
<[email protected]> wrote:
+1
On Dec 29, 2010 12:49 PM, "Igor Vaynberg"<[email protected]>
wrote:
i think core and sandbox are probably better names and more clearly
communicate the intent.
-igor
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 9:30 AM, Martijn Dashorst
<[email protected]> wrote:
Currently our wicketstuff repo at github is one gigantic repo
containing everything. I'd like to propose to split the repository
into two:
- github.com/wicketstuff/wicketstuff (containing just the
core
project)
- github.com/wicketstuff/archive (containing all the
side projects)
The idea is that wicketstuff core is already a huge project, and
I'd
like to make the footprint contain just that, without the legacy
projects that surround the core.
I'd like to do this before folks start cloning away, so before we
announce the availability. But if anyone wants to wait that's fine
with me as well...
Anyone got ideas or a different opinion?
Martijn
--
Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best:
http://wicketinaction.com
--
Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
