Re: [naviserver-devel] Mercurial at Bitbucket is ending. What next?

[Gustaf Neumann]

The situation with the aolserver repos in general and
on bitbucket in particular is confusing,  i also fail to understand,
why there is a need for two aolserver repos at bitbucket:

   https://bitbucket.org/aolserver/

I do not know, who the owner of these repos is. Cloning
these repos  and to convert these to git is no rocket science,
but one needs write permissions in preferable the "aolserver"
bitbucket repo to make this public.

all the best
-g

On 03.04.20 18:13, Andrew Piskorski wrote:

Can someone with write access also convert the AOLserver Mercurial
repositories on BitBucket to Git, so we still have that stuff for
historical reference, once BitBucket deletes all the Mercurial
repositories?

https://bitbucket.org/aolserver/aolserver-40x/src/default/
https://bitbucket.org/aolserver/aolserver/src/default/

Or is there a better repository for the old AOLserver code somewhere
else?  I see some stuff on GitHub, but I'm not sure how that compares
to the BitBucket repositories.

https://github.com/aolserver/aolserver
https://github.com/aolserver/aolserver.github.com
https://github.com/aolserver/nsoracle
https://aolserver.github.io/2010/04/aolserver-on-github/
https://github.com/OldsSourcesBackups/AolWebServer




___
naviserver-devel mailing list
naviserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/naviserver-devel

Re: [naviserver-devel] Mercurial at Bitbucket is ending. What next?

[Andrew Piskorski]

Can someone with write access also convert the AOLserver Mercurial
repositories on BitBucket to Git, so we still have that stuff for
historical reference, once BitBucket deletes all the Mercurial
repositories?

https://bitbucket.org/aolserver/aolserver-40x/src/default/
https://bitbucket.org/aolserver/aolserver/src/default/

Or is there a better repository for the old AOLserver code somewhere
else?  I see some stuff on GitHub, but I'm not sure how that compares
to the BitBucket repositories.

https://github.com/aolserver/aolserver
https://github.com/aolserver/aolserver.github.com
https://github.com/aolserver/nsoracle
https://aolserver.github.io/2010/04/aolserver-on-github/
https://github.com/OldsSourcesBackups/AolWebServer

-- 
Andrew Piskorski 


___
naviserver-devel mailing list
naviserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/naviserver-devel

Re: [naviserver-devel] Mercurial at Bitbucket is ending. What next?

[Gustaf Neumann]

In case you are wondering about the changed modification
dates of the NaviServer repositories at bitbucket: i've updated
the "description" fields of the git repositories, since these are
used for search on bitbucket. These had to be updated manually...

-g



___
naviserver-devel mailing list
naviserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/naviserver-devel

Re: [naviserver-devel] Mercurial at Bitbucket is ending. What next?

[Zoran Vasiljevic]

On Sun, 9 Feb 2020 10:51:55 +0100
Gustaf Neumann  wrote:

> all NaviServer repositories are now converted on bitbucket to git.

You are a gentleman and a scholar!



___
naviserver-devel mailing list
naviserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/naviserver-devel

Re: [naviserver-devel] Mercurial at Bitbucket is ending. What next?

[Gustaf Neumann]

Dear all,

all NaviServer repositories are now converted on bitbucket to git.

The "old" mercurial repositories are still on bitbucket, but named
with the suffix "-hg". For example the mercurial repository of
main naviserver is called "naviserver-hg", while "naviserver"
is the git repository.

In case, you still want to keep your local repository in mercurial
as long allowed by bitbucket (until May 31, 2020), just add
the suffix "-hg" to the .hg/hgrc file:


--- .hg/hgrc-orig   2020-02-09 10:10:32.0 +0100
+++ .hg/hgrc2020-02-09 10:05:58.0 +0100
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 # example repository config (see "hg help config" for more info)
 [paths]
-default = https://bitbucket.org/naviserver/naviserver
+default = https://bitbucket.org/naviserver/naviserver-hg
 
 # path aliases to other clones of this repo in URLs or filesystem paths

 # (see "hg help config.paths" for more info)


Otherwise, just delete your mercurial repositories and make
fresh git clones from bitbucket.

Please commit from now on to the git repositories.

All the best
-gn


On 07.02.20 17:43, Gustaf Neumann wrote:

Dear all,

So far, i've received only positive feedback!

I'll start with the migration on the weekend, but try to make
the migration phase as short as possible to reduce documentation
and communication work for differences in the migration phase.

all the best

-gn


On 10.01.20 09:55, Gustaf Neumann wrote:

Dear all,

Bitbucket has defined the following dates for shutting down their
mercurial support, which are in the not too distant future:

 - February 1, 2020: users will no longer be able to create new 
Mercurial repositories

 - June 1, 2020: users will not be able to use Mercurial features in
    Bitbucket or via its API and all Mercurial repositories will be 
removed.
 - All current Mercurial functionality in Bitbucket will be available 
through May 31, 2020.


These dates are approaching quickly. I fully agree with Zoran about git,
although there are as well merits in other systems. Keep in mind that we
have more than 70 naviserver+modules repositories, and we have to
carry the accounts and permissions to some target system.

From the effort point of view, a migration from bitbucket+hg to 
bitbucket+git
would be my preferred way, in case, i am doing the conversions. So 
please

speak up now, if someone objects.

As a proof of concept, i've transformed two repositories to
bitbucket+git by adding a "-git" suffix to the repository name:

   https://bitbucket.org/naviserver/naviserver-git

I would be glad, if some of our developers with git experience
can checkout  this git repo of naviserver to see, whether this
looks ok to you. In the future, we should change from a tagging
model to a branching model, but currently this is just a 1:1 conversion.

Once we are convinced this is fine, then we can do the same on all 70+
other repos, and make some tests to check, if everything looks fine.
Then in the last step do a final renaming game
to swap to the original repository names:

  1) rename hg-repo from NAME to NAME-hg
  2) rename git-repo from NAME-git to NAME
  3) set hg repo to READ-only

... and certainly change the documentation/READMEs
from hg to git.

... please do not commit to the git repo, continue to
commit to hg for the time being. Part of the conversion has
to be done manually (creating the repos, renaming the repos,
transferring individual permissions), part can be done scripted.

all the best

-gn

On 29.08.19 12:06, Zoran Vasiljevic wrote:

On Thu, 29 Aug 2019 09:13:17 + (UTC)
Roderick  wrote:


After reading something about mercurial only for cloning Naviservers
Repo, I read this:

https://bitbucket.org/blog/sunsetting-mercurial-support-in-bitbucket

It would be nice to have NaviServer as fossil repo. :)

I believe most logical choice is git. I'm not fan of any of
the systems, to be honest. Just, the chance that we will have
to switch again (cvs -> mercurial -> ?) is less if the ? = git.
___
naviserver-devel mailing list
naviserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/naviserver-devel

Re: [naviserver-devel] Mercurial at Bitbucket is ending. What next?

[Gustaf Neumann]

Dear all,

So far, i've received only positive feedback!

I'll start with the migration on the weekend, but try to make
the migration phase as short as possible to reduce documentation
and communication work for differences in the migration phase.

all the best

-gn


On 10.01.20 09:55, Gustaf Neumann wrote:

Dear all,

Bitbucket has defined the following dates for shutting down their
mercurial support, which are in the not too distant future:

 - February 1, 2020: users will no longer be able to create new 
Mercurial repositories

 - June 1, 2020: users will not be able to use Mercurial features in
    Bitbucket or via its API and all Mercurial repositories will be 
removed.
 - All current Mercurial functionality in Bitbucket will be available 
through May 31, 2020.


These dates are approaching quickly. I fully agree with Zoran about git,
although there are as well merits in other systems. Keep in mind that we
have more than 70 naviserver+modules repositories, and we have to
carry the accounts and permissions to some target system.

From the effort point of view, a migration from bitbucket+hg to 
bitbucket+git

would be my preferred way, in case, i am doing the conversions. So please
speak up now, if someone objects.

As a proof of concept, i've transformed two repositories to
bitbucket+git by adding a "-git" suffix to the repository name:

   https://bitbucket.org/naviserver/naviserver-git

I would be glad, if some of our developers with git experience
can checkout  this git repo of naviserver to see, whether this
looks ok to you. In the future, we should change from a tagging
model to a branching model, but currently this is just a 1:1 conversion.

Once we are convinced this is fine, then we can do the same on all 70+
other repos, and make some tests to check, if everything looks fine.
Then in the last step do a final renaming game
to swap to the original repository names:

  1) rename hg-repo from NAME to NAME-hg
  2) rename git-repo from NAME-git to NAME
  3) set hg repo to READ-only

... and certainly change the documentation/READMEs
from hg to git.

... please do not commit to the git repo, continue to
commit to hg for the time being. Part of the conversion has
to be done manually (creating the repos, renaming the repos,
transferring individual permissions), part can be done scripted.

all the best

-gn

On 29.08.19 12:06, Zoran Vasiljevic wrote:

On Thu, 29 Aug 2019 09:13:17 + (UTC)
Roderick  wrote:


After reading something about mercurial only for cloning Naviservers
Repo, I read this:

https://bitbucket.org/blog/sunsetting-mercurial-support-in-bitbucket

It would be nice to have NaviServer as fossil repo. :)

I believe most logical choice is git. I'm not fan of any of
the systems, to be honest. Just, the chance that we will have
to switch again (cvs -> mercurial -> ?) is less if the ? = git.



___
naviserver-devel mailing list
naviserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/naviserver-devel



___
naviserver-devel mailing list
naviserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/naviserver-devel

Re: [naviserver-devel] Mercurial at Bitbucket is ending. What next?

[Wolfgang Winkler]

Dear Gustaf!

I just cloned the new git repository and compiled it without any 
problems. The history dates back to the first revision in 2006, the tags 
are up-to-date.


I haven't found any problems.

Regards,

Wolfgang

Am 10.01.20 um 09:55 schrieb Gustaf Neumann:

Dear all,

Bitbucket has defined the following dates for shutting down their
mercurial support, which are in the not too distant future:

 - February 1, 2020: users will no longer be able to create new 
Mercurial repositories

 - June 1, 2020: users will not be able to use Mercurial features in
    Bitbucket or via its API and all Mercurial repositories will be 
removed.
 - All current Mercurial functionality in Bitbucket will be available 
through May 31, 2020.


These dates are approaching quickly. I fully agree with Zoran about git,
although there are as well merits in other systems. Keep in mind that we
have more than 70 naviserver+modules repositories, and we have to
carry the accounts and permissions to some target system.

From the effort point of view, a migration from bitbucket+hg to 
bitbucket+git

would be my preferred way, in case, i am doing the conversions. So please
speak up now, if someone objects.

As a proof of concept, i've transformed two repositories to
bitbucket+git by adding a "-git" suffix to the repository name:

   https://bitbucket.org/naviserver/naviserver-git

I would be glad, if some of our developers with git experience
can checkout  this git repo of naviserver to see, whether this
looks ok to you. In the future, we should change from a tagging
model to a branching model, but currently this is just a 1:1 conversion.

Once we are convinced this is fine, then we can do the same on all 70+
other repos, and make some tests to check, if everything looks fine.
Then in the last step do a final renaming game
to swap to the original repository names:

  1) rename hg-repo from NAME to NAME-hg
  2) rename git-repo from NAME-git to NAME
  3) set hg repo to READ-only

... and certainly change the documentation/READMEs
from hg to git.

... please do not commit to the git repo, continue to
commit to hg for the time being. Part of the conversion has
to be done manually (creating the repos, renaming the repos,
transferring individual permissions), part can be done scripted.

all the best

-gn

On 29.08.19 12:06, Zoran Vasiljevic wrote:

On Thu, 29 Aug 2019 09:13:17 + (UTC)
Roderick  wrote:


After reading something about mercurial only for cloning Naviservers
Repo, I read this:

https://bitbucket.org/blog/sunsetting-mercurial-support-in-bitbucket

It would be nice to have NaviServer as fossil repo. :)

I believe most logical choice is git. I'm not fan of any of
the systems, to be honest. Just, the chance that we will have
to switch again (cvs -> mercurial -> ?) is less if the ? = git.



___
naviserver-devel mailing list
naviserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/naviserver-devel



--

*Wolfgang Winkler*
Geschäftsführung
wolfgang.wink...@digital-concepts.com
mobil +43.699.19971172

dc:*büro*
digital concepts Novak Winkler OG
Software & Design
Landstraße 68, 5. Stock, 4020 Linz
www.digital-concepts.com 
tel +43.732.997117.72
tel +43.699.1997117.2

Firmenbuchnummer: 192003h
Firmenbuchgericht: Landesgericht Linz


___
naviserver-devel mailing list
naviserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/naviserver-devel

Re: [naviserver-devel] Mercurial at Bitbucket is ending. What next?

[Gustaf Neumann]

Dear all,

Bitbucket has defined the following dates for shutting down their
mercurial support, which are in the not too distant future:

 - February 1, 2020: users will no longer be able to create new 
Mercurial repositories

 - June 1, 2020: users will not be able to use Mercurial features in
    Bitbucket or via its API and all Mercurial repositories will be 
removed.
 - All current Mercurial functionality in Bitbucket will be available 
through May 31, 2020.


These dates are approaching quickly. I fully agree with Zoran about git,
although there are as well merits in other systems. Keep in mind that we
have more than 70 naviserver+modules repositories, and we have to
carry the accounts and permissions to some target system.

From the effort point of view, a migration from bitbucket+hg to 
bitbucket+git

would be my preferred way, in case, i am doing the conversions. So please
speak up now, if someone objects.

As a proof of concept, i've transformed two repositories to
bitbucket+git by adding a "-git" suffix to the repository name:

   https://bitbucket.org/naviserver/naviserver-git

I would be glad, if some of our developers with git experience
can checkout  this git repo of naviserver to see, whether this
looks ok to you. In the future, we should change from a tagging
model to a branching model, but currently this is just a 1:1 conversion.

Once we are convinced this is fine, then we can do the same on all 70+
other repos, and make some tests to check, if everything looks fine.
Then in the last step do a final renaming game
to swap to the original repository names:

  1) rename hg-repo from NAME to NAME-hg
  2) rename git-repo from NAME-git to NAME
  3) set hg repo to READ-only

... and certainly change the documentation/READMEs
from hg to git.

... please do not commit to the git repo, continue to
commit to hg for the time being. Part of the conversion has
to be done manually (creating the repos, renaming the repos,
transferring individual permissions), part can be done scripted.

all the best

-gn

On 29.08.19 12:06, Zoran Vasiljevic wrote:

On Thu, 29 Aug 2019 09:13:17 + (UTC)
Roderick  wrote:


After reading something about mercurial only for cloning Naviservers
Repo, I read this:

https://bitbucket.org/blog/sunsetting-mercurial-support-in-bitbucket

It would be nice to have NaviServer as fossil repo. :)

I believe most logical choice is git. I'm not fan of any of
the systems, to be honest. Just, the chance that we will have
to switch again (cvs -> mercurial -> ?) is less if the ? = git.



___
naviserver-devel mailing list
naviserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/naviserver-devel

Re: [naviserver-devel] Mercurial at Bitbucket is ending. What next?

[Roderick]

On Fri, 30 Aug 2019, Jeff Rogers wrote:


It's struck me as odd that the source was hosted on bitbucket ...


Perhaps the best would be to host it in a server running naviserver
with fossil as cgi (or scgi or http proxy) script. :)

https://fossil-scm.org/index.html/doc/trunk/www/server/

I find naviserver interesting because of its integration with tcl.
I really do not understand why tcl is getting forgotten and python
(that contains the entire tcl in its tkinter) is so popular.

In any case, putting it together with other things in some way associated
with tcl (like fossil) could be of advantage.

Rodrigo


___
naviserver-devel mailing list
naviserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/naviserver-devel

Re: [naviserver-devel] Mercurial at Bitbucket is ending. What next?

[Jeff Rogers]

Sourceforge supports mercurial repos as well as git.   It's struck me as 
odd that the source was hosted on bitbucket while the "main page" and 
distributions are on SF;  is there history for why the source repo isn't 
on SF as well?


-J


On 08/29/2019 03:06 AM, Zoran Vasiljevic wrote:

On Thu, 29 Aug 2019 09:13:17 + (UTC)
Roderick  wrote:


After reading something about mercurial only for cloning Naviservers
Repo, I read this:

https://bitbucket.org/blog/sunsetting-mercurial-support-in-bitbucket

It would be nice to have NaviServer as fossil repo. :)

I believe most logical choice is git. I'm not fan of any of
the systems, to be honest. Just, the chance that we will have
to switch again (cvs -> mercurial -> ?) is less if the ? = git.



___
naviserver-devel mailing list
naviserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/naviserver-devel





___
naviserver-devel mailing list
naviserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/naviserver-devel

Re: [naviserver-devel] Mercurial at Bitbucket is ending. What next?

[Roderick]

On Thu, 29 Aug 2019, Zoran Vasiljevic wrote:


I believe most logical choice is git. I'm not fan of any of
the systems, to be honest.


Yes, it seems. I am also not a fan of anyone, and much less of
this inflation of versioning systems. But I see advantages of
CVS and fossil, in quite very different issues: the first because
it saves everything as rcs files, the seccond because of its
simplicity, flexibility, everything (repo, wiki, tickets, etc)
integrated in a single sqlite file that can be moved in the file
system or to other computer as a normal file, simple commands
that also remind cvs.

I am not a professional programmer, do not have a lot of experience
with this systems, but I use fossil (not in its full power) for
my personall small programs. It is also the system used in tcl/tk
and many tcl projects.

Perhaps the following is interesting:

https://www.fossil-scm.org/xfer/doc/trunk/www/inout.wiki
https://www.fossil-scm.org/xfer/doc/trunk/www/mirrortogithub.md

Rodrigo


___
naviserver-devel mailing list
naviserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/naviserver-devel

Re: [naviserver-devel] Mercurial at Bitbucket is ending. What next?

[Zoran Vasiljevic]

On Thu, 29 Aug 2019 09:13:17 + (UTC)
Roderick  wrote:

> After reading something about mercurial only for cloning Naviservers
> Repo, I read this:
> 
> https://bitbucket.org/blog/sunsetting-mercurial-support-in-bitbucket
> 
> It would be nice to have NaviServer as fossil repo. :)

I believe most logical choice is git. I'm not fan of any of 
the systems, to be honest. Just, the chance that we will have
to switch again (cvs -> mercurial -> ?) is less if the ? = git.



___
naviserver-devel mailing list
naviserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/naviserver-devel

[naviserver-devel] Mercurial at Bitbucket is ending. What next?

[Roderick]

After reading something about mercurial only for cloning Naviservers
Repo, I read this:

https://bitbucket.org/blog/sunsetting-mercurial-support-in-bitbucket

It would be nice to have NaviServer as fossil repo. :)

Rodrigo


___
naviserver-devel mailing list
naviserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/naviserver-devel