Le 12/05/2015 03:19, Hans Bakker a écrit :
Nicolas -0.9
:) I voted -0 Hans not -0.9 it's not the same ;)
I guess it's a matter of feeling, I did not even vote and got a -0.9 :)
Jacques
Le 12/05/2015 08:59, Nicolas Malin a écrit :
Le 12/05/2015 03:19, Hans Bakker a écrit :
Nicolas -0.9
:) I voted -0 Hans not -0.9 it's not the same ;)
12.05.15 um 03:19 schrieb Hans Bakker:
Thank you for the interst and 126 messages on this subject.
Looks like we do not want to go with the technological developments yet.
Thank you all for your time.
The result of the vote if we should move to git:
Binding:
Jacques -0.9
Nicolas -0.9
Jacopo -1
Adam +0
That was a translation of your feeling :-)
On 12/05/15 14:51, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
I guess it's a matter of feeling, I did not even vote and got a -0.9 :)
Jacques
Le 12/05/2015 08:59, Nicolas Malin a écrit :
Le 12/05/2015 03:19, Hans Bakker a écrit :
Nicolas -0.9
:) I voted -0 Hans not
should move to git:
Binding:
Jacques -0.9
Nicolas -0.9
Jacopo -1
Adam +0
Scott +0
Nicolas +0
Non Binding:
Adrian +0
Taher Alkhateeb: +1
Christian Carlow +1
Pierre +0
michael.brohl +0
Christian +0
Gil portenseigne +0
Nicolas +0.9
On 05/05/15 10:01, Hans Bakker wrote:
As the discussions seem to end
Thank you for the interst and 126 messages on this subject.
Looks like we do not want to go with the technological developments yet.
Thank you all for your time.
The result of the vote if we should move to git:
Binding:
Jacques -0.9
Nicolas -0.9
Jacopo -1
Adam +0
Scott +0
Nicolas +0
Non
, 2015-05-12 at 08:19 +0700, Hans Bakker wrote:
Thank you for the interst and 126 messages on this subject.
Looks like we do not want to go with the technological developments yet.
Thank you all for your time.
The result of the vote if we should move to git:
Binding:
Jacques -0.9
the workflow can be simple as is described in:
http://www.apache.org/dev/git.html
we could use this as the MVP (minimum viable product) so mimic basically
how people use SVN and then slowly take advantage of the possibilities
of GIT.
Regards,
Hans
On 06/05/15 13:35, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
On May 6, 2015, at 3:34 AM, Hans Bakker h.bak...@antwebsystems.com wrote:
It is no use, setting up an implementation plan when there is still a
possibility people will reject it.
Ok, if this was your goal then it seems you got your answer: most people are
inclined to Git (or will not object
Then you better change your vote? At it is now, we cannot even create an
implementation proposal.
Hans
On 06/05/15 13:22, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
On May 6, 2015, at 3:34 AM, Hans Bakker h.bak...@antwebsystems.com wrote:
It is no use, setting up an implementation plan when there is still a
On May 6, 2015, at 8:56 AM, Hans Bakker mailingl...@antwebsystems.com wrote:
When attached to a jira issue, then after approval (or no objection) merging
the patch into the master branch by a committer so difficult?
Did you read the document that you are asking us to refer to as your
On May 6, 2015, at 8:46 AM, Hans Bakker mailingl...@antwebsystems.com wrote:
the workflow can be simple as is described in:
http://www.apache.org/dev/git.html
we could use this as the MVP (minimum viable product) so mimic basically how
people use SVN and then slowly take advantage of the
When attached to a jira issue, then after approval (or no objection)
merging the patch into the master branch by a committer so difficult?
I am sorry, i do not see a problem here
Regards,
Hans
On 06/05/15 13:53, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
On May 6, 2015, at 8:46 AM, Hans Bakker
On May 6, 2015, at 8:43 AM, Taher Alkhateeb slidingfilame...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Jacopo,
I am a bit of a noob on ASF policies. Is it possible to guide us on
resources to read to be able to draft any kind of proposal?
Hi Taher,
please read my previous messages on this subject because they
Ok let first wait for the vote result seeing your comment at the -1 .
However then still we need a vote again after the proposal... if you
make it a -0.9 then when the proposal is agreed, no need for a vote.
for people who would like to help, there are plenty of GIT workflow
proposals in
After creating a proper plan sure, now formally you have blocked
progress with your veto.
Hans
On 06/05/15 14:16, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
On May 6, 2015, at 9:10 AM, Hans Bakker mailingl...@antwebsystems.com wrote:
However then still we need a vote again after the proposal... if you make
My vote is clearly stated: propose a Git workflow that is inline with the ASF
policies and that is good for the OFBiz project and I will vote positively.
Jacopo
On May 6, 2015, at 8:29 AM, Hans Bakker mailingl...@antwebsystems.com wrote:
Then you better change your vote? At it is now, we
Consensus is always needed.
Best regards,
Pierre
Op woensdag 6 mei 2015 heeft Hans Bakker mailingl...@antwebsystems.com
het volgende geschreven:
Ok let first wait for the vote result seeing your comment at the -1 .
However then still we need a vote again after the proposal... if you make
On May 6, 2015, at 9:10 AM, Hans Bakker mailingl...@antwebsystems.com wrote:
However then still we need a vote again after the proposal... if you make it
a -0.9 then when the proposal is agreed, no need for a vote.
are you really considering the idea of doing such an important change for the
On May 6, 2015, at 9:54 AM, Hans Bakker mailingl...@antwebsystems.com wrote:
After creating a proper plan sure, now formally you have blocked progress
with your veto.
The veto is only on commit changes, this vote is not for a commit change so my
-1 doesn't count as a veto.
Jacopo
Hi Jacopo,
I am a bit of a noob on ASF policies. Is it possible to guide us on
resources to read to be able to draft any kind of proposal? Can you also
define what is an implementation plan? Is it like a document, a migration
process, a commit workflow, infrastructure or what exactly?
Taher
C'mon Hans
The vote was about should we convert the master SVN repository of
Apache OFBIz to a GIT version?
Nobody stops you from creating a proper plan.
Christian
Am 06.05.2015 09:54, schrieb Hans Bakker:
After creating a proper plan sure, now formally you have blocked
progress with your
-1
not because I don't like Git or because I don't think it wouldn't be a good fit
for OFBiz; the reason for my negative vote is that in the vote there is no
mention to the workflow the project will adopt; at the ASF there are some
limitations due to Infrastructure and/or license/legal reasons
+0
Adrian Crum
Sandglass Software
www.sandglass-software.com
On 5/4/2015 8:01 PM, Hans Bakker wrote:
As the discussions seem to end, can i propose a vote?
The question : should we convert the master SVN repository of Apache
OFBIz to a GIT version?
The possible answers are according the apache
Jacopo,
This vote was about IF we choose to go to Git, if the answer is yes,
sure then we need an implementation plan.
It is no use, setting up an implementation plan when there is still a
possibility people will reject it.
Regards,
Hans
PS. We really have to change the way we work here,
That's my point as well. These most recent votes have not had concrete
actions attached to them. Without a concrete plan, any kind of +# vote
is not definitive; a +1 could mean anything in these cases.
I chose +0 instead of -0 or -1, as I do believe git is the right
approach, but we need
+0.9
Julien.
Le 05/05/2015 05:01, Hans Bakker a écrit :
As the discussions seem to end, can i propose a vote?
The question : should we convert the master SVN repository of Apache
OFBIz to a GIT version?
The possible answers are according the apache voting guidelines at:
-0 (maybe it's the same that +0 ;) ), I vote +0 when I will use git,
but currently the fthe fear of change :).
Le 05/05/2015 05:01, Hans Bakker a écrit :
As the discussions seem to end, can i propose a vote?
The question : should we convert the master SVN repository of Apache
OFBIz to a GIT
+0
On 05/05/2015 05:01, Hans Bakker wrote:
As the discussions seem to end, can i propose a vote?
The question : should we convert the master SVN repository of Apache
OFBIz to a GIT version?
The possible answers are according the apache voting guidelines at:
Am 05.05.2015 05:01, schrieb Hans Bakker:
As the discussions seem to end, can i propose a vote?
+0
I personally prefer git anytime over svn, but it seems a few people are
not comfortable with git (yet). I'm using it already with ofbiz locally
(no commit via git yet but will try it soon)
+0
Git is a great tool once you understand the mechanisms and get used to it.
But I also think that it might be too early to make it the main source
control for the project. It takes extra effort for some and the
committers have to handle pull requests and such.
With the other bigger sub
smime.p7m
Description: S/MIME encrypted message
Full ack for Adams remarks.
There should be a +0.5 like „I like this idea, but the realization has to be
well planned for a point in the future where the all over organization fits the
needs for a different contribution process ;-)
So, +0.5 from me.
Martin Becker
ecomify GmbH
www.ecomify.de
+0
I like git and use it primarily but I'm not sure that adoption of git at
the ASF has reached the point where I'm prepared to force it onto the
unwilling.
On 5 May 2015 15:01, Hans Bakker h.bak...@antwebsystems.com wrote:
As the discussions seem to end, can i propose a vote?
The question :
As the discussions seem to end, can i propose a vote?
The question : should we convert the master SVN repository of Apache
OFBIz to a GIT version?
The possible answers are according the apache voting guidelines at:
https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
*
+1: 'Yes lets do it'
*
This may be the nail in the coffin, at least for now, but +0, needs more
discussion/planning. I've been using git-svn for longer than most with
ofbiz, and would really love it if we were already using git, but it's
just too soon.
Just because git is decentralized, doesn't mean that there is
Le 29/04/2015 21:47, Adam Heath a écrit :
On 04/29/2015 02:26 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
Related to this thread but not with previous discussions, see how Github is used at the ASF https://wiki.apache.org/commons/UsingGIT ; notably for
Applying Pull Requests (for svn based components)
, David E. Jones a écrit :
On 20 Apr 2015, at 23:21, Pierre Smits pierre.sm...@gmail.com wrote:
Quoting:
We are also prepared to be assertive regarding this situation. If the
project
does not move to GIT then Brainfood is willing to participate in a
consortium of
organizations that will peer
are also prepared to be assertive regarding this situation. If the
project
does not move to GIT then Brainfood is willing to participate in a
consortium of
organizations that will peer with each other to share updates to
the master
branch for their local OFBiz repository. Such an arrangement
On 04/29/2015 02:26 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
Related to this thread but not with previous discussions, see how
Github is used at the ASF https://wiki.apache.org/commons/UsingGIT ;
notably for Applying Pull Requests (for svn based components)
Jacques
Yeah, that's actually troubling. The
Related to this thread but not with previous discussions, see how Github is used at the ASF https://wiki.apache.org/commons/UsingGIT ; notably for
Applying Pull Requests (for svn based components)
Jacques
On 04/28/2015 03:39 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
Le 25/04/2015 01:14, Adam Heath a écrit :
On 04/23/2015 06:00 PM, David E. Jones wrote:
An FYI for all committers: create an account on GitHub (if you don't
already have one) and add your @apache.org email address to it, and
within a few hours
Le 28/04/2015 16:48, Adam Heath a écrit :
Something about the 3 laws
I'm more a Philip K. Dick aficionado, I believe robots will not follow the laws
at some point, hu are we serious? ;D
Jacques
Le 25/04/2015 01:14, Adam Heath a écrit :
On 04/23/2015 06:00 PM, David E. Jones wrote:
An FYI for all committers: create an account on GitHub (if you don't already have one) and add your @apache.org email address to it, and within a
few hours you'll show up in the contributor graphs. I tried
Le 25/04/2015 10:23, Pierre Smits a écrit :
Creating the JIRA issue(s) early - not just after the commit, as a
notification for release notes - will help increasing the awareness of all
and opens the door to share insights before the commit and not after. Give
the issue its obligatory waiting
Subject: Re: move to git.
Yes, but these are commiters contributions, i mean non-commiters one should go
thru jira.
Le 23/04/2015 01:54, David E. Jones a écrit :
On 22 Apr 2015, at 16:49, Adam Heath doo...@brainfood.com wrote:
On 04/22/2015 06:13 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
On Apr 22, 2015, at 11:41 PM, Adam Heath doo...@brainfood.com wrote:
When this happened, we had to relicense the entire project
Thanks Jacopo, from this point I was ready to jump, it was MIT!
I guess someone else already told me, just that I'm have not read it in my 1095
initial emails backlog yet :/
Jacques
Le 23/04/2015 01:13, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
On Apr 22, 2015, at 11:41 PM, Adam Heath doo...@brainfood.com
Since Svn 1.7 (or 1.6?) the .svn files are no longer scattered all over but in
a .svn folder at root of the WC
Jacques
Le 23/04/2015 17:50, Adam Heath a écrit :
Let's not forgot that the complete project history is available offline, that
the .svn files are not scattered all over
Le 23/04/2015 17:50, Adam Heath a écrit :
Ok, everything passes, git svn dcommit $HASH, flood the mailing list.
flood the mailing list, you said it :p
Jacques
On Apr 27, 2015, at 3:16 PM, Jacques Le Roux jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com
wrote:
Thanks Ean for letting us know, I was unaware this was needed. I just added
mine, but I'm still not in the contributors list, I guess it takes some time,
or is another step, like joigning something, needed?
Hi
Le 23/04/2015 17:50, Adam Heath a écrit :
As for that last item I mentioned, if we do switch, I would *love* to include
such ancient history.
That would be a plus indeed...
Jacques
On Apr 25, 2015, at 1:14 AM, Adam Heath doo...@brainfood.com wrote:
On 04/23/2015 06:00 PM, David E. Jones wrote:
An FYI for all committers: create an account on GitHub (if you don't already
have one) and add your @apache.org email address to it, and within a few
hours you'll show up in
According to this presentation regarding the Apache Way
http://events.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/TheApacheWay15.pdf
(slides 30-31) all contributions are considered equal. That means the big,
the small, those of minor and major importance.
Nevertheless, collaborating early and
Subject: Re: move to git.
According to this presentation regarding the Apache Way
http://events.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/TheApacheWay15.pdf
(slides 30-31) all contributions are considered equal. That means the big,
the small, those of minor and major importance.
Nevertheless
On 04/23/2015 06:00 PM, David E. Jones wrote:
An FYI for all committers: create an account on GitHub (if you don't already
have one) and add your @apache.org email address to it, and within a few hours
you'll show up in the contributor graphs. I tried this and am now showing up
there:
On 04/23/2015 04:22 AM, Scott Gray wrote:
I'm just saying my current project has been using it for 18 months and it's
been a long time now since we've lost any changes. This is 15-30 devs
that were all new to git.
In my experience most issues come from:
- Reverting merge commits and picking
On 04/23/2015 03:28 AM, Scott Gray wrote:
I am thoroughly familiar with Git.
Git always screws things up.
If git always screwed things up, then those other 3 projects wouldn't be
using it.
ps: I realize this was a quote from Adrian, and not Scott.
These two statements are complete
On 04/23/2015 06:00 PM, David E. Jones wrote:
An FYI for all committers: create an account on GitHub (if you don't already
have one) and add your @apache.org email address to it, and within a few hours
you'll show up in the contributor graphs. I tried this and am now showing up
there:
They are contradictions because they have been taken out of context.
I was responding to the suggestion that I don't like Git because I have
never used it. I have used it on three projects, and there have been
problems - even when Git experts use it. So, my dislike is based on my
experiences
I am thoroughly familiar with Git.
Git always screws things up.
These two statements are complete contradictions. Outcomes in git only
appear strange while you're still unfamiliar with it.
I've been using the git-svn bridge to commit to OFBiz for about 4 years and
using a git repo on my current
I'm just saying my current project has been using it for 18 months and it's
been a long time now since we've lost any changes. This is 15-30 devs
that were all new to git.
In my experience most issues come from:
- Reverting merge commits and picking the wrong mainline
- Pushing to the wrong
I can imagine
the mess someone might make trying to rewrite history on the remote repo.
That is what I am imagining also.
When/if the vote occurs to make the change, I will vote +0 - because I
don't like using Git, but I don't want to stand in the way of others
using it.
I'm looking
Strange occurrences stopped happening for me after a couple of months and
generally stopped once all developers either stopped using git client UIs
that used settings they didn't understand or they started using the command
line…
That’s my experience, too, and therefore one of my reasons to
On Apr 23, 2015, at 11:42 AM, Martin Becker martin.bec...@ecomify.de wrote:
Maybe it’s necessary to think about which processes and workflows maybe the
ones that are expected by the current and especially future
audience/clients/contributors from a state of the art, living and ongoing
open
that their origin is cryptographically confirmed.
- Original Message -
From: Gil Portenseigne gil.portensei...@nereide.fr
Subject: Re: move to git.
Yes, but these are commiters contributions, i mean non-commiters one should
go
thru jira.
Yes, but these are commiters contributions, i mean non-commiters one should go
thru jira.
Le 21 avril 2015 23:00:26 UTC+02:00, Adam Heath doo...@brainfood.com a écrit :
On 04/21/2015 08:09 AM, Gil portenseigne wrote:
In every case, contribution will have to be given within Jira to get
into
the code but
would still know who performed the merge. We could also sign the commits
so that their origin is cryptographically confirmed.
- Original Message -
From: Gil Portenseigne gil.portensei...@nereide.fr
Subject: Re: move to git.
Yes, but these are commiters contributions, i mean
From: Pierre Smits pierre.sm...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: move to git.
That, Ean, says more about github than SVN. See
https://fisheye6.atlassian.com/users/ofbiz and
https://fisheye6.atlassian.com/graph/ofbiz showing a totally different
story.
How do I see the people who submitted patches via
Message -
From: Gil Portenseigne gil.portensei...@nereide.fr
Subject: Re: move to git.
Yes, but these are commiters contributions, i mean non-commiters one
should go
thru jira.
.
- Original Message -
From: Gil Portenseigne gil.portensei...@nereide.fr
Subject: Re: move to git.
Yes, but these are commiters contributions, i mean non-commiters one should
go
thru jira.
, Ean Schuessler e...@brainfood.com wrote:
From: Pierre Smits pierre.sm...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: move to git.
That, Ean, says more about github than SVN. See
https://fisheye6.atlassian.com/users/ofbiz and
https://fisheye6.atlassian.com/graph/ofbiz showing a totally different
story.
How
On 04/22/2015 01:00 PM, Pierre Smits wrote:
By committers referencing the contributors to the JIRA issue in the commit
report.
But that's not reflected in the links you provided, or users aren't
getting mentioned. With the git workflow, whoever created the commit
will *definately* be
From: Pierre Smits pierre.sm...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: move to git.
By committers referencing the contributors to the JIRA issue in the commit
report.
But that is not reflected in your referenced visualization:
https://fisheye6.atlassian.com/users/ofbiz
I think it would be easier if you
On 22 Apr 2015, at 16:49, Adam Heath doo...@brainfood.com wrote:
On 04/22/2015 06:13 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
On Apr 22, 2015, at 11:41 PM, Adam Heath doo...@brainfood.com wrote:
When this happened, we had to relicense the entire project from GPL to
Apache 2.0.
Gr It was
https://github.com/ansible/ansible/graphs/contributors
mpdehaan used to be *the* ansible guy. It was his original creation.
He has since moved on, but 1000 contributors that have actual code
inside the primary repository.
Also look at
On 22 Apr 2015, at 16:14, Pierre Smits pierre.sm...@gmail.com wrote:
Indeed, let's not amalgamate everything and keep the discussion clean. The
https://fisheye6.atlassian.com/graph/ofbiz does show information about the
jira issue (including the contributor, if done correctly). Just click on
Github shows the committers as contributors. The links I provided just
shows a better overview of those contributors.
Best regards,
Pierre Smits
*ORRTIZ.COM http://www.orrtiz.com*
Services Solutions for Cloud-
Based Manufacturing, Professional
Services and Retail Trade
http://www.orrtiz.com
On 04/22/2015 06:13 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:
On Apr 22, 2015, at 11:41 PM, Adam Heath doo...@brainfood.com wrote:
When this happened, we had to relicense the entire project from GPL to Apache
2.0.
Gr It was not GPL! :-)
It was something tho; I may be wrong on that, I
It occasionally happens that committers don't reference the contributors.
But that is seldom.
Best regards,
Pierre Smits
*ORRTIZ.COM http://www.orrtiz.com*
Services Solutions for Cloud-
Based Manufacturing, Professional
Services and Retail Trade
http://www.orrtiz.com
On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at
On Apr 22, 2015, at 11:41 PM, Adam Heath doo...@brainfood.com wrote:
When this happened, we had to relicense the entire project from GPL to Apache
2.0.
Gr It was not GPL! :-)
Jacopo
The links you provide only show developers who have write access to
svn. Git(not just github, let's not conflate anything) keeps track of
more than that. If there was someone who had forked a repo, comitted
something on their local desktop, then pushed to a public server, and
then someone on
Indeed, let's not amalgamate everything and keep the discussion clean. The
https://fisheye6.atlassian.com/graph/ofbiz does show information about the
jira issue (including the contributor, if done correctly). Just click on
the blue i icon to the right of the comment excerpt. You'll see a modal
Quoting:
We are also prepared to be assertive regarding this situation. If the
project
does not move to GIT then Brainfood is willing to participate in a
consortium of
organizations that will peer with each other to share updates to the master
branch for their local OFBiz repository
:
Quoting:
We are also prepared to be assertive regarding this situation. If the
project
does not move to GIT then Brainfood is willing to participate in a
consortium of
organizations that will peer with each other to share updates to the
master
branch for their local OFBiz repository
:
On 20 Apr 2015, at 23:21, Pierre Smits pierre.sm...@gmail.com wrote:
Quoting:
We are also prepared to be assertive regarding this situation. If the
project
does not move to GIT then Brainfood is willing to participate in a
consortium of
organizations that will peer with each other to share
Le 21/04/2015 02:08, Ean Schuessler a écrit :
- Original Message -
From: Jacques Le Roux jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com
Subject: Re: move to git.
Like Adrian and mostly for the same reasons, I don't believe we need Git.
But there is one other major reason which has already been discussed
does not move to GIT then Brainfood is willing to participate in a
consortium of
organizations that will peer with each other to share updates to the
master
branch for their local OFBiz repository. Such an arrangement will,
effectively,
result in a distributed master repository image.
Thanks Ean
2015, at 23:21, Pierre Smits pierre.sm...@gmail.com wrote:
Quoting:
We are also prepared to be assertive regarding this situation. If the
project
does not move to GIT then Brainfood is willing to participate in a
consortium of
organizations that will peer with each other to share updates
21, 2015, at 2:11 PM, Pierre Smits pierre.sm...@gmail.com wrote:
As far as I can see it, this whole discussion regarding GIT vs SVN (move to
GIT), is dependent on and blocked by the perceptions of (and viewpoints on)
the (in)clarity surrounding how we (as the contributing community) deal
...@les7arts.com wrote:
Le 21/04/2015 02:08, Ean Schuessler a écrit :
- Original Message -
From: Jacques Le Roux jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com
Subject: Re: move to git.
Like Adrian and mostly for the same reasons, I don't believe we need Git.
But there is one other major reason which has
for Cloud-
Based Manufacturing, Professional
Services and Retail Trade
http://www.orrtiz.com
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 8:21 AM, Pierre Smits pierre.sm...@gmail.com
wrote:
Quoting:
We are also prepared to be assertive regarding this situation. If the
project
does not move to GIT then Brainfood
21, 2015 at 10:23 AM, Jacques Le Roux
jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com wrote:
Le 21/04/2015 02:08, Ean Schuessler a écrit :
- Original Message -
From: Jacques Le Roux jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com
Subject: Re: move to git.
Like Adrian and mostly for the same reasons, I don't believe we
That wasn't what happened to me. Here are the steps I took and the outcome:
1. Git pull to update my local copy.
2. Make changes to 4 files.
3. Stash push.
4. Pull to get latest repo changes.
5. Stash pop.
6. Commit - 4 files changed.
7. Push - dozens of files changed.
!!!???
8. Check commit log
Le 21/04/2015 02:14, Adam Heath a écrit :
On 04/20/2015 07:12 PM, Adam Heath wrote:
I used to be in the same boat; in the early days, I would blame git for losing my work.
Damn you frigging piece of software!
However, I also realized that the linux-kernel was using it to do much more
On 20 Apr 2015, at 23:21, Pierre Smits pierre.sm...@gmail.com wrote:
Quoting:
We are also prepared to be assertive regarding this situation. If the
project
does not move to GIT then Brainfood is willing to participate in a
consortium of
organizations that will peer with each other
Le 21/04/2015 12:02, David E. Jones a écrit :
On 20 Apr 2015, at 23:21, Pierre Smits pierre.sm...@gmail.com wrote:
Quoting:
We are also prepared to be assertive regarding this situation. If the
project
does not move to GIT then Brainfood is willing to participate in a
consortium
Comments inline.
From: David E. Jones d...@me.com
Subject: Re: move to git.
It may seem like chaos to have forks and changes spread all over the place...
but that isn't caused by the distributed source management approach, it's just
made visible and clear by the approach. Right now
://www.orrtiz.com*
Services Solutions for Cloud-
Based Manufacturing, Professional
Services and Retail Trade
http://www.orrtiz.com
On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 3:35 PM, Ean Schuessler e...@brainfood.com wrote:
Comments inline.
From: David E. Jones d...@me.com
Subject: Re: move to git.
It may seem
.
Please don't, so we would not only move to Git and/or Maven and/or Moqui but
while doing so we would also compete with Jira? :-o
Jacques
Best regards,
Pierre Smits
*ORRTIZ.COM http://www.orrtiz.com*
Services Solutions for Cloud-
Based Manufacturing, Professional
Services and Retail Trade
http
1 - 100 of 141 matches
Mail list logo
