On Tue, 2011-02-01 at 22:27 +0200, Andrew wrote: > 01.02.2011 17:37, Mike Noyes пишет: > > On Tue, 2011-02-01 at 14:15 +0200, Andrew wrote: > >> 01.02.2011 14:02, KP Kirchdoerfer пишет: > >>> Am Dienstag, 1. Februar 2011, um 12:45:00 schrieb Andrew: > >>>> 31.01.2011 23:06, Mike Noyes пишет: > >>>>> Charles, > >>>>> I just enabled svn for our project again. Git is enabled also, but I > >>>>> suspect migration to git is more complex. > >>>> I think that migration to any SCM is trivial till it's possible to get > >>>> access to source tree (latest version of files) via HTTP. And gitweb > >>>> provides this at 1st look. Link to latest revision of file > >>>> <path>/<filename> looks like this: > >>>> http://<projectname>.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=<path>;a=blob_pla > >>>> in;f=<filename>;hb=HEAD > >>> Latest versions should be possible, Charles rsync backup seems to be > >>> valid, I > >>> have the latest packages and sources in my local cvs copy, and finally SF > >>> should have a backup as well. > >>> > >>> IMHO non-trivial are the changes needed for buildtool (a new scm > >>> downloader is > >>> needed, the sources.cfg needs rework and probably every buildtool.mk > >>> file). > >>> Also we need to change the documentation, helper files like genpage.sh and > >>> maybe some more corner stuff. That's why I'd like to have a stable > >>> version first > >>> and move to a new SCM later, IF possible... > >>> > >>> kp > >> Buildtool actually takes data from CVS via http. And it isn't too hard > >> to modify ViewCVS.pm to take data from git via gitweb - like from CVS > >> via viewvc. > > Everyone, > > My preference is a move to git, provided buildtool SCM transition is > > equal. The git community is dominating SCMs (see github). However, > > project member training (commands, distributed nature, etc.) is steeper > > than a move to SVN. > > > > +1 Git > > > > I propose Charles work on SVN and Andrew work on Git, so we can see what > > issues arise. This should allow our developers to make a decision on > > which SCM will serve our community best. > > > > Andrew, > > Please let me know if you have access to our git repository. > > https://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/sourceforge/wiki/Git > Yes, I have access. Now migration almost complete - I uploaded partial > snapshot into git (snapshot of bering-uclibc4 tree), and updated > buildtool logic to work with git. At least, "buildtool.pl source linux" > works OK - so I expect no troubles. As I said, migration is trivial :) > > I added new paremeter for both server and source package - "Repo", which > contains pair project/repository (by default - leaf/leaf) - this will > make multi-branch development easier. > > For completion I need that somebody push latest available snapshot into > git with modified server names into packages (cvs-sourceforge is > replaced by leaf-sourceforge, cvs4-sourceforge is replaced by > leaf4-sourceforge and so on). I did this by shell command "find . -name > buildtool.cfg | xargs perl -i -p -e 's/cvs4-/leaf4-/g;s/cvs-/leaf-/g'" > into source tree, it may be inaccurate, but at 1st look it doesn't > replace anything except server name.
Charles, Are you familiar enough with git to accomplish this task? -- Mike Noyes <mhnoyes at users.sourceforge.net> http://sourceforge.net/users/mhnoyes/ SF.net Projects: leaf, sourceforge/sitedocs ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Special Offer-- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE (a $49 USD value)! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! Download using promo code Free_Logger_4_Dev2Dev. Offer expires February 28th, so secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsight-sfd2d _______________________________________________ leaf-devel mailing list leaf-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
