Re: [Scons-dev] Trial SCons migration to git on github

[Jason Kenny]

I have done the opposite myself ( moved code from guthub to bitbucket) it is 
very easy either direction.
However I have to ask. Is this about moving to Git from HG or to Github?I think 
these are two different questions.
Personally I see why some would want to move to git. However i don't see why 
one would want to move github as well.

Jason
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2016 11:03:05 -0800
From: b...@baddogconsulting.com
To: scons-dev@scons.org
Subject: [Scons-dev] Trial SCons migration to git on github

All,

I wanted to see how hard this would be.
Pretty simple. Github has a migrator which did all the work.
If anyone wants to take a look and see if they find any issues with the 
migration take a look here
https://github.com/bdbaddog/scons-gh-migrate
-Bill


___
Scons-dev mailing list
Scons-dev@scons.org
https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev   
  ___
Scons-dev mailing list
Scons-dev@scons.org
https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev

Re: [Scons-dev] Trial SCons migration to git on github

[Alexandre Feblot]

If I look at the branch pchdll in which 2 commits were done, githib doesn't 
show anything before those commits. This seems wrong.
https://bitbucket.org/scons/scons/commits/branch/pchdll 

https://github.com/bdbaddog/scons-gh-migrate/commits/pchdll 


Focusing on the first commit (VC11 needs PCH objects added to the link line.):
https://bitbucket.org/scons/scons/commits/552d60649cdbfc46979a493fb0d8a8618c892f79?at=pchdll
 

https://github.com/bdbaddog/scons-gh-migrate/commit/4de52be091f23e3b8c8e0027bd1d27b6bec92ef9
 


Bitbucket properly shows the single change in src/engine/SCons/Tool/mslink.py, 
whereas github seems to think that all files are just added to an empty project 
(making it impossible to see the actual change).

Conclusion: It looks like there is an issue with where branches are created 
from.

--
Alexandre Feblot

> Le 6 janv. 2016 à 20:28, William Blevins  a écrit :
> 
> It looks right at a glance.
> 
> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 7:03 PM, Bill Deegan  > wrote:
> All,
> 
> I wanted to see how hard this would be.
> Pretty simple. Github has a migrator which did all the work.
> If anyone wants to take a look and see if they find any issues with the 
> migration take a look here
> https://github.com/bdbaddog/scons-gh-migrate 
> 
> -Bill
> 
> ___
> Scons-dev mailing list
> Scons-dev@scons.org 
> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> Scons-dev mailing list
> Scons-dev@scons.org
> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev

___
Scons-dev mailing list
Scons-dev@scons.org
https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev

Re: [Scons-dev] Rumour…

[William Blevins]

On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 6:57 PM, Gary Oberbrunner 
wrote:

>
> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 1:55 PM, Bill Deegan 
> wrote:
>
>> I'm of the opinion that there's no need to address the bug tracker at the
>> same time as move the repo and/or hg->git.
>> I only use hg for scons, git for everything else.
>
>
> I agree.
>
> +1

>
> --
> Gary
>
> ___
> Scons-dev mailing list
> Scons-dev@scons.org
> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>
>
___
Scons-dev mailing list
Scons-dev@scons.org
https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev

Re: [Scons-dev] Trial SCons migration to git on github

[William Blevins]

It looks right at a glance.

On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 7:03 PM, Bill Deegan 
wrote:

> All,
>
> I wanted to see how hard this would be.
> Pretty simple. Github has a migrator which did all the work.
> If anyone wants to take a look and see if they find any issues with the
> migration take a look here
> https://github.com/bdbaddog/scons-gh-migrate
> -Bill
>
> ___
> Scons-dev mailing list
> Scons-dev@scons.org
> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>
>
___
Scons-dev mailing list
Scons-dev@scons.org
https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev

[Scons-dev] Trial SCons migration to git on github

[Bill Deegan]

All,

I wanted to see how hard this would be.
Pretty simple. Github has a migrator which did all the work.
If anyone wants to take a look and see if they find any issues with the
migration take a look here
https://github.com/bdbaddog/scons-gh-migrate
-Bill
___
Scons-dev mailing list
Scons-dev@scons.org
https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev

Re: [Scons-dev] Rumour…

[Gary Oberbrunner]

On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 1:55 PM, Bill Deegan 
wrote:

> I'm of the opinion that there's no need to address the bug tracker at the
> same time as move the repo and/or hg->git.
> I only use hg for scons, git for everything else.


I agree.


-- 
Gary
___
Scons-dev mailing list
Scons-dev@scons.org
https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev

Re: [Scons-dev] Atlassian, BitBucket, Mercurial

[Bill Deegan]

My 2 Cents.

(seems this sat in my drafts folder since september of 2015.. oops)

1) I don't like mercurial.  Git has a better flow for dealing with open
source projects in my opinion. Having worked (and contributed code to) both
buildbot and plone I can say with confidence that the create a branch for
every bug/feature/project, create pull request, and when the pull request
is merged the branch doesn't get carried into the master repo.  Yeah
there's bookmarks, I don't get them, I don't want to learn them (it's
throwaway brain capacity for me as I only use mercurial for SCons).  I'm
not religious when it comes to the languages tools are written in, only
that they make it easy to get the work done, and have decent user/developer
communities so if we run into issues we can have confidence that we can get
them resolved in a reasonable time frame.

2) While I agree with Dirk that its good to be in a place where we can just
code, and I think we're there now, I don't think that the transition to git
has to be that disruptive.  I don't see any reason we'd NEED to change
anything but the repo type.  Changing Wiki, bugtracking, etc are not (IMHO)
required to be changed when we change repo types.

3) Roundup, I need to apologize to Dirk as I've yet to put up an instance
on my colo machine (which also runs SCons' buildbot master)

4) Yes Dirk is a core contributor/developer/StackOverFlowAnswerGod, just in
case we've not acknowledged it elsewhere!

-Bill

On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Dirk Bächle  wrote:

> Hi again,
>
> On 23.09.2015 13:45, Russel Winder wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2015-09-23 at 07:08 -0400, Gary Oberbrunner wrote:
>>
>>> Could be; pretty much _every_ project I can think of is using git
>>> now.  I
>>> have to twist my brain around every time I work on SCons. :-)
>>>
>>
>>
> here are my 2cents regarding changing our VCS or project hosting:
>
> Let's. Not. Switch.
>
> You ask why? Because I'm happy. I'm so happy that---after a seemingly
> never-ending series of events, with project managers leaving, switching
> from SVN to hg, migrating our Wiki to Bitbucket, and so on---we've finally
> reached a state where I can do what I like most: coding.
>
> It's tempting to think: yeah, let's just import the current repo into git,
> push it to Github, and we're good to go again. But I count myself to be a
> member of the core developer team. So, in the case of switching to another
> VCS I'd feel obliged to work on setting up and properly documenting the new
> workflows in the Wiki. I'd also feel obliged to answer questions from
> newcomers, or people getting confused over the VCS change.
> Which is both fine per se, but it would keep me from doing what I like
> most (and am good at, to a certain extent): coding.
>
> But anybody out there has a good chance of convincing me that switching is
> good for the project overall, by (a priori to the actual switch) either:
>
>   - providing a full replacement for the current descriptions of our
> general development workflow, and about howto creating pull requests in
> particular, for our Wiki and volunteering to answer all upcoming questions
> about it, or
>   - jumping on a large bug or issue (like the python3 branch, for
> example), setting up his preferred git-hg bridge, working on stuff, and
> wowing me and everybody else with the way he makes impressive progress in a
> very short time. ;)
>
> Which is sad because Git still has so much wrong with it, and Mercurial
>> has so much going for it. However, the social and commercial pressure
>> seems inexorable that Git shall be the monopoly.
>>
>>
> I don't feel any pressure in this direction. (see also below)
>
> I think there possible needs to be a new debate about whether to switch
>> to Git and GitHub.
>>
>
> I don't think so.
>
> When the decision was made to move from Subversion
>
>> on Tigris to Mercurial on BitBucket, I had some issues/doubts, but the
>> final decision seemed fine and not a problem. However time has moved on
>> and we are are now in an era where to get any traction as a FOSS
>> project you appear to have to use GitHub.
>>
>>
> Can you elaborate a bit on this conclusion? I fail to see the connection
> between "Project is at Github" and "Project is successful" as a direct
> consequence. How exactly do you get from one to the other?
> Isn't it more the fact that, since a lot of projects are at Github (for
> whatever reasons), there's a high probability that a successful project is
> at Github? Have you checked for the opposite side of the scale? My bet
> would be that the worst doing projects are at Github too...because almost
> everybody is there!
>
> I always thought that to get any traction and have success, you need to
> have a good product/project. Why don't we continue working on that in the
> first place?
> We have a full roadmap and TODO list, and last time I checked there were
> 1500+ unresolved issues in our Tigris tracker. ;)
>
> OK, I realize it is all "kool kids", "hipsters", and "people who 

Re: [Scons-dev] Rumour…

[Bill Deegan]

I'm of the opinion that there's no need to address the bug tracker at the
same time as move the repo and/or hg->git.
I only use hg for scons, git for everything else.



On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 2:02 PM, Dirk Bächle  wrote:

> Hi there,
>
> On 05.01.2016 18:25, Bill Deegan wrote:
>
>> Not a rumor. ;)
>> http://lwn.net/Articles/669924/
>>
>> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.devel/150459/focus=150960
>>
>>
>>
> when I read those two threads/articles it doesn't seem to be about "moving
> Python to Github"...they're considering (PEP481) to migrate certain
> supporting repositories, that don't need a bug tracker and can be used as a
> stand-alone repo.
> Am I getting this right?
>
> If yes, this is a different situation than we would have...we still have a
> bug tracker to migrate. And so far, everybody who tried to come up with a
> proposal about how to do it, while losing no significant data, seems to
> have given up on it. Would this change if we move to Github?
>
> It may be true that a lot of people nowadays simply know how to use "git"
> (or maybe they only "think" that they know ;) ), but I can't see a big
> boost of new contributors growing from this fact alone. OpenHatch has moved
> to Github recently (including their bug tracker) and they're still
> struggling and desperately calling for help. Maybe it is the "wrong"
> example, but it doesn't seem to be *that* easy. And someone has to do the
> migration work...I'd like to see volunteers and their ideas for the
> migration first, before supporting this idea.
>
> I'm not completely opposed to the idea of moving to Github ( and git,
> which I also know a bit, at least I "think" I do ;) ), but deep in my heart
> I still very much feel like Nick Coghlan (see
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.devel/150459/focus=150960 ) and
> think about Mercurial and SCons as part of the Python family. This weighs a
> lot in my opinion, so you have to put much more than "convenience" and "I
> suspect"s on the other side of the scale to convince me. :)
>
> So much for my 2c.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Dirk
>
>
> ___
> Scons-dev mailing list
> Scons-dev@scons.org
> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev
>
___
Scons-dev mailing list
Scons-dev@scons.org
https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev