On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 6:02 PM, Stephen Leake
<[email protected]> wrote:
>> Process: building on my normal workflow (sync with mtn; hg convert to
>> a Mercurial repo), I've converted to git using hg-fast-export, removed
>> non-relevant branches, run the tests, and pushed to Github.

What is the benefit of not using native mtn git_export (I see no
difference, just asking)?

After cloning your repo I get the following list of authors:

$ git log | grep Author | sort | uniq
Author: gdsrh6 <devnull@localhost>
Author: simonjwright <[email protected]>
Author: simon <[email protected]>
Author: stephen_leake-2 <[email protected]>

I think it should be cleaned up, which is easy with mtn git_export
--authors-file. There are two simon@ and who is devnull@? I suggest to
use full names and not monotone nicks.

I see no other problems. Thanks!

>> Anyway, see what you think. I can always start over if necessary!
>
> I think I'll stay a monotone hold out a little longer. So ada-mode will
> stay on monotone until it dies, or another maintainer takes over.

Can you explain what you do not like with ada-mode residing Github?

I see the following benefits:
- sources are now ready to be picked up by MELPA and users can easily
get the latest fixes,
- both sources and recent fixes are easy to browse,
- entry barrier for sporadic contributors is now much lower.

If you insist on staying with monotone then are you at least happy
with mirroring the repo on github? I can ask my cron for this and then
can play with MELPA packaging.

In the git mirror scenario, can I at least use git format-patch when
producing patches to be sent to the mailing list?

-- 
Piotr Trojanek

_______________________________________________
Emacs-ada-mode mailing list
[email protected]
http://host114.hostmonster.com/mailman/listinfo/emacs-ada-mode_stephe-leake.org

Reply via email to