Hello all,
In a previous discussion about Ubuntu distributed development, someone
suggested that we graph the number of Ubuntu branches that share
history with upstream.
I think that's a very interesting thing to graph, but I have
absolutely no idea on how to get that information -- even with
On Wed, 2010-02-10 at 13:58 +, Jonathan Lange wrote:
In a previous discussion about Ubuntu distributed development, someone
suggested that we graph the number of Ubuntu branches that share
history with upstream.
I think that's a very interesting thing to graph, but I have
absolutely no
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 2:08 PM, Jelmer Vernooij jel...@canonical.com wrote:
On Wed, 2010-02-10 at 13:58 +, Jonathan Lange wrote:
In a previous discussion about Ubuntu distributed development, someone
suggested that we graph the number of Ubuntu branches that share
history with upstream.
On Wed, 2010-02-10 at 14:10 +, Jonathan Lange wrote:
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 2:08 PM, Jelmer Vernooij jel...@canonical.com wrote:
On Wed, 2010-02-10 at 13:58 +, Jonathan Lange wrote:
In a previous discussion about Ubuntu distributed development, someone
suggested that we graph the
On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 15:16:18 +0100, Jelmer Vernooij jel...@canonical.com
wrote:
So checking whether a revision is part of another branches' ancestry is
not really possible then, if I understand the current database scheme
correctly. You should be able to detect the common ancestry in most of
On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 08:46:37 -0600, John Arbash Meinel j...@arbash-meinel.com
wrote:
Where is this script going to be running? I wrote a trivial command that
lets you run:
bzr in-ancestry branch1 branch2
And reports back if the ancestry of branch1 is in branch2.
On Thu, 04 Feb 2010 14:57:25 +1300, Michael Hudson
michael.hud...@canonical.com wrote:
James Westby wrote:
On Wed, 06 Jan 2010 09:41:17 +1300, Michael Hudson
michael.hud...@canonical.com wrote:
James Westby wrote:
Is it possible to get a query of old ones, and just run a bulk-update
On Wed, 2010-02-10 at 21:46 +, James Westby wrote:
Some of them have been upgraded. If it's easier for me to do an info
against all of them and filter out those not in 2a then I can do so.
I think thats easiest.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
--
James Westby and I had some time together in Portland to talk about UDD
stuff.
We talked about a few things:
* Looms, their use today and where they should go
* The operational issues with the package importer and how the bzr team
can help
* analysed a few specific bugs and tried to come up with
On 11 February 2010 13:18, Robert Collins robert.coll...@canonical.com wrote:
James Westby and I had some time together in Portland to talk about UDD
stuff.
We talked about a few things:
* Looms, their use today and where they should go
* The operational issues with the package importer and
Martin asks what a collision is.
The situation with package imports is that we have a branch B, which
both Ubuntu developers and the package importer can commit to.
Collisions are what happen when the package importer sees something
arrive in the archive which is either not in, or different to,
On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 13:18:30 +1100, Robert Collins
robert.coll...@canonical.com wrote:
James Westby and I had some time together in Portland to talk about UDD
stuff.
Yes, it was good to have the time, thanks for coming and for sending
this mail.
Firstly though, a couple of overview points:
On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 13:33:27 +1100, Martin Pool m...@canonical.com wrote:
I'd like to let looms progress, but not (unless james or others feel
differently) add them into the dependency chain for getting UDD going.
No, we don't have to add it to the chain to get it going, but I think
it's one
UDD now has an active mailing list, a Launchpad project and a bug/task
list. Does it make sense to begin thinking about UDD as a product? Would
it be valuable to talk about UDD x.y vs x.z?
Code wise, I guess the product is a mix of LP features, Bazaar
features and Bazaar plugins. OTOH, those
14 matches
Mail list logo
