On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 10:06:45AM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-09-06 at 15:20 +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 08:51:06AM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote:
> > > Ok, so now that we have dists/sid and dists/trunk (which is for
> > > development
> > > and experimental
On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 10:06:45AM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-09-06 at 15:20 +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 08:51:06AM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote:
> > > Ok, so now that we have dists/sid and dists/trunk (which is for
> > > development
> > > and experimental
On Tue, 2005-09-06 at 15:20 +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 08:51:06AM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote:
> > Ok, so now that we have dists/sid and dists/trunk (which is for development
> > and experimental stuff); how is this actually supposed to work? I
> > understand
> > the scen
On Tue, 2005-09-06 at 22:25 +0900, Horms wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 08:51:06AM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote:
> > Ok, so now that we have dists/sid and dists/trunk (which is for development
> > and experimental stuff); how is this actually supposed to work? I
> > understand
> > the scenario w
On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 08:51:06AM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote:
> Ok, so now that we have dists/sid and dists/trunk (which is for development
> and experimental stuff); how is this actually supposed to work? I understand
> the scenario when we have 2.6.12 in sid and 2.6.13rc in trunk; stick
> any
On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 08:51:06AM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote:
> Ok, so now that we have dists/sid and dists/trunk (which is for development
> and experimental stuff); how is this actually supposed to work? I understand
> the scenario when we have 2.6.12 in sid and 2.6.13rc in trunk; stick
> any
Ok, so now that we have dists/sid and dists/trunk (which is for development
and experimental stuff); how is this actually supposed to work? I understand
the scenario when we have 2.6.12 in sid and 2.6.13rc in trunk; stick
any new development stuff in trunk, backport to sid if desired, do sid
relea
On Fri, Sep 02, 2005 at 07:09:36PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 11:10:19PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
>
> No reply?
>
> Bastian
Was there something to reply ? I didn't get the impression that you gave any
valuable reason, and "read again" is not something which i unders
On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 11:10:19PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
No reply?
Bastian
--
We do not colonize. We conquer. We rule. There is no other way for us.
-- Rojan, "By Any Other Name", stardate 4657.5
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubs
On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 07:12:57PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> Ok, explain me why you want to have it part of the kernel subdir then, if we
> are going to empty it of any further content ?
Why exists arch and utils? Just move anything up.
> I really don't get why you are opposing this move, so ho
On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 07:11:12PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 12:07:02PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Thanks, we can now go ahead and do the cleanup.
>
> The linux-2.6 move was not part of this dicision.
Ok, explain me why you want to have it part of the kernel subdir
On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 12:07:02PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> Thanks, we can now go ahead and do the cleanup.
The linux-2.6 move was not part of this dicision.
Bastian
--
Totally illogical, there was no chance.
-- Spock, "The Galileo Seven", stardate 2822.3
Hi all,
We finally solved our difficulties, and i did the moving around to hopefulyl
their definite place for a while at least of the different things.
We now have :
dists/sarge
dists/sarge-security
dists/sid
dists/trunk
dists/common
releases
people
releases is the old tag dir, wh
On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 12:15:56PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 10:43:24AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Waldi, i would like your express comment on this, but i believe from your
> > previous comments that this should suite you.
>
> And please rename tags to releases or so
On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 10:43:24AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> Waldi, i would like your express comment on this, but i believe from your
> previous comments that this should suite you.
And please rename tags to releases or so. We only have release sources
in it and this makes that clear.
Bastian
On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 12:06:15PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 10:43:24AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > We then can add a :
> > dists/common
> > For stuff common to all distributions, like the utils and so on, but which
> > can
> > live also under the the individual dis
On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 10:43:24AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> We then can add a :
> dists/common
> For stuff common to all distributions, like the utils and so on, but which can
> live also under the the individual distribs if we need them.
We don't have anything really common. The versions bet
On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 10:43:24AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 04:49:59PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > with the advent of the unified kernel package for 2.6 some of the
> > original SVN layout has become irrelevant. As a background her
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 04:49:59PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> Hi,
>
> with the advent of the unified kernel package for 2.6 some of the
> original SVN layout has become irrelevant. As a background here is
> how things used to look.
Ok, this mess can no longer continue, since it is pa
On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 12:15:23PM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-08-30 at 15:33 +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 05:41:34PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> > > On Fri, Aug 26, 2005 at 05:53:38PM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 05:53:41PM +0900,
On Tue, 2005-08-30 at 15:33 +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 05:41:34PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 26, 2005 at 05:53:38PM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 05:53:41PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > > > > svk m
On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 05:41:34PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 26, 2005 at 05:53:38PM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 05:53:41PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> > [...]
> > > > > svk may be different, if so,
> > > > > this is a excellent time to di
On Fri, Aug 26, 2005 at 05:53:38PM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 05:53:41PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> [...]
> > > > svk may be different, if so,
> > > > this is a excellent time to discuss that.
> > >
> > > It just gets crazy if it can't find merg
Hello,
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 04:49:59PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> Personally, in the context of the two questions above, I advocate
> trunk/linux-2.6
> trunk/linux-2.6-experimental
I opt for this solution, too.
Best regards
Frederik Schueler
--
ENOSIG
signature.asc
Description: Digital s
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 05:53:41PM +0900, Horms wrote:
[...]
> > > svk may be different, if so,
> > > this is a excellent time to discuss that.
> >
> > It just gets crazy if it can't find merge points.
>
> Could you elaborate a little. I think you are the only one us
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 05:53:41PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> > Depends on what you mean with "developed". We saw that it is not
> > possible to get regular testbuilds of the repository version and I broke
> > 3 uploads because of this. If we want to be able to regulary push
> > working versions into te
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 04:56:14PM -0300, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> Horms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 11:33:08AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> >> On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 05:54:30PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> >> > > This layout removes the indicator, where changes may be int
er of different versions of different kernels.
For some sarge is the head branch, for some sid is, and
for some experimental is. The typical SVN layout (which people
seem mildly obsessed with), puts whatever happens to be the
head branch in trunk, and everything else in branch -
in our case per-distribut
Horms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 11:33:08AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 05:54:30PM +0900, Horms wrote:
>> > > This layout removes the indicator, where changes may be introduced
>> > > without breaking too much.
>> > experimental seems like a pr
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 07:02:13PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> I believe part of the proposal is that development kernels are
> targeted for experimental. And the sid ones are a bit more stable.
This applies only to some packages.
Bastian
--
Knowledge, sir, should be free to all!
-- H
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 02:14:53PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 07:02:13PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> > I believe part of the proposal is that development kernels are
> > targeted for experimental. And the sid ones are a bit more stable.
>
> This applies only to some packages.
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 11:33:08AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 05:54:30PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> > > This layout removes the indicator, where changes may be introduced
> > > without breaking too much.
> > experimental seems like a pretty fair indication.
>
> Only if you do
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 05:54:30PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> > This layout removes the indicator, where changes may be introduced
> > without breaking too much.
> experimental seems like a pretty fair indication.
Only if you do regular cleanups of not longer used trees. Otherwise you
remain with
sid/
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 11:05:35AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> But we should begin to disable arches where we don't
> have a possitive result.
Hmm, this will not hold building but non-working kernels away, so it
makes no sense.
Bastian
--
The more complex the mind, the greater
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 10:46:43AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> They could be releases/sid/linux-nonfree-2.6 and
> releases/sid/arch/mips/linux-patch-2.6.12-mips ?
What do you want to do with the contents of utils? We currently
differentiate between kernel themself, documentation and support utils.
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 10:35:11AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 09:56:55AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > main
> > main/sid
> > main/sid/linux-2.6
> > main/experimental/linux-2.6
> > main/sarge
> releases
> > people
>
> This layout removes the indicator, where c
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 10:32:59AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 04:49:59PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> > 1. Should linux-2.6 go in trunk/kernel/ or just trunk.
> >Given that we no longer need source and per-arch directories,
> >it seems logical to just move it up to trun
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 10:32:59AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 04:49:59PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> > 1. Should linux-2.6 go in trunk/kernel/ or just trunk.
> >Given that we no longer need source and per-arch directories,
> >it seems logical to just move it up to trun
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 09:56:55AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> main
> main/sid
> main/sid/linux-2.6
> main/experimental/linux-2.6
> main/sarge
releases
> people
This layout removes the indicator, where changes may be introduced
without breaking too much.
Bastian
--
Humans do claim a
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 04:49:59PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> 1. Should linux-2.6 go in trunk/kernel/ or just trunk.
>Given that we no longer need source and per-arch directories,
>it seems logical to just move it up to trunk/
linux-nonfree-2.6 and linux-patch-2.6.12-mips are missing from your
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 09:56:55AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 04:49:59PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> > Personally, in the context of the two questions above, I advocate
> > trunk/linux-2.6
> > trunk/linux-2.6-experimental
>
> I vote for this also, and would probably vote for
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 09:58:44AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> oh, and additional point, could we stop moving things around without
> a prior discussion on this list in the future?
I think that would be an excellent idea.
Especaially for anything that is in unstable.
--
Horms
--
To UNSU
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 04:49:59PM +0900, Horms wrote:
> Personally, in the context of the two questions above, I advocate
> trunk/linux-2.6
> trunk/linux-2.6-experimental
I vote for this also, and would probably vote for moving the sarge and co
branches here too.
> However I am happy with pr
oh, and additional point, could we stop moving things around without
a prior discussion on this list in the future?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> But right now there are two problems that need to be resolved
> so we know where things are supposed to go.
>
> 1. Should linux-2.6 go in trunk/kernel/ or just trunk.
>Given that we no longer need source and per-arch directories,
>it seems logical to just move it up to trunk/
>But t
Hi,
with the advent of the unified kernel package for 2.6 some of the
original SVN layout has become irrelevant. As a background here is
how things used to look.
trunk/kernel/source/kernel-source-2.6.8/
.../kernel-source-2.6.10/
.../kernel-source-2.6.11
Hello,
as explained earlier, i moved the subversion layout to be :
kernel/trunk/kernel/powerpc
kernel/trunk/kernel/source
kernel/trunk/kernel-2.4/powerpc
kernel/trunk/utils/initrd-tools
and then the tags to somethign like.
kernel/tags/kernel/powerpc/2.6.7-3
iand the branches to :
47 matches
Mail list logo
