done just now
https://github.com/wicketstuff/wicketstuff
all branches should be there, perhaps we can clean them up a bit though.
cheers,
-igor
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 8:17 AM, Michael O'Cleirigh
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Sorry about responding so late on this. Is the import into
> wicketstuff/wick
Hello,
Sorry about responding so late on this. Is the import into
wicketstuff/wicketstuff done? because only the master branch and
wicketstuff-p...@3267 are showing in github. There were 180 branches
in the test import.
In the test import I had these questions: (which may be moot now that
Go ahead. There's not much we can do otherwise?
Martijn
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 5:13 PM, Martin Grigorov wrote:
> I can confirm that my pre-github (git-svn) copy 'master' of wicketstuff-core
> from sf.net is identical with the one from wicketstuff-test-import (pure
> git).
> Verified with 'diff
I can confirm that my pre-github (git-svn) copy 'master' of wicketstuff-core
from sf.net is identical with the one from wicketstuff-test-import (pure
git).
Verified with 'diff -r -u' locally.
I *assume* the branches are OK too...
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 4:59 PM, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
> are we goo
are we good to go with this import? if so i can push it into the
proper repo and we can move forward...
-igor
On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 6:23 AM, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
> alright, import is done here
>
> https://github.com/wicketstuff/wicketstuff-test-import
>
> its not perfect, but workable. if we d
alright, import is done here
https://github.com/wicketstuff/wicketstuff-test-import
its not perfect, but workable. if we decide its good enough we can put
it into the proper repo.
-igor
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 11:19 PM, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
> my import is still running, at r5012 so almost ther
my import is still running, at r5012 so almost there. im going to bed,
so i will check it out tomorrow morning.
cheers,
-igor
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 11:17 PM, Michael O'Cleirigh
wrote:
> Igor,
>
> Let me know if your current import works or not.
>
> I've given up on the JGit approach. At leas
Igor,
Let me know if your current import works or not.
I've given up on the JGit approach. At least right now there isn't
enough time to get it to work properly for extracting branches.
There may be a way to extract branches using the git filter-branch
command directly; it seemed to work in
im importing using the u...@wicketstuff.org addresses, but i dont
think that matters much.
-igor
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 5:45 PM, Michael O'Cleirigh
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> In testing last week it took about 5 hours to clone from svn using git-svn.
> I've been trying to trying to get a version of t
Hello,
In testing last week it took about 5 hours to clone from svn using
git-svn. I've been trying to trying to get a version of the repository
ready but its been taking longer than I wanted.
I think what we will need to do is to clone it locally and prepare it
and then upload to github.
import is running really slow, even from a local copy of svn repo.
going to take a while...
-igor
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 10:54 AM, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
> running a manual import right now with git svn, lets see how that goes.
>
> -igor
>
> On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 10:50 AM, Martijn Dashorst
> w
running a manual import right now with git svn, lets see how that goes.
-igor
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 10:50 AM, Martijn Dashorst
wrote:
> "Import ran too long. Try running locally with svn2git or git-svn."
>
> On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 8:57 AM, Igor Vaynberg
> wrote:
>> gah. i will try a manual
"Import ran too long. Try running locally with svn2git or git-svn."
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 8:57 AM, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
> gah. i will try a manual one and see if that goes better. can you
> forward the error message to me, i didnt get one...
>
> -igor
>
> On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 9:29 AM, Marti
gah. i will try a manual one and see if that goes better. can you
forward the error message to me, i didnt get one...
-igor
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 9:29 AM, Martijn Dashorst
wrote:
> I received an error message that the import has failed.
>
> Martijn
>
> On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 6:24 AM, Jeremy T
I received an error message that the import has failed.
Martijn
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 6:24 AM, Jeremy Thomerson
wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 3:35 PM, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
>
>> i started the import here:
>>
>> https://github.com/wicketstuff/wicketstuff
>>
>> -igor
>>
>
> I removed everyone
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 3:35 PM, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
> i started the import here:
>
> https://github.com/wicketstuff/wicketstuff
>
> -igor
>
I removed everyone from the SF.net project except Igor, Martijn, and myself.
I took SVN commit permissions away from the three of us. This should
prevent
i started the import here:
https://github.com/wicketstuff/wicketstuff
-igor
On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 11:54 AM, Martijn Dashorst
wrote:
> So we're all set and currently running a test import. Once we validate
> that the test import is correct, we'll do the final import.
>
> Unless there's a disas
So we're all set and currently running a test import. Once we validate
that the test import is correct, we'll do the final import.
Unless there's a disaster/major concern I'd like to propose to do the
migration next wednesday (dec 22nd 2010). Any objections to this date?
If you want to test the s
Before anyone does the svn-git job look at this little helper:
https://github.com/nirvdrum/svn2git
https://www.negativetwenty.net/redmine/projects/show/svn2git
mf
Am 16.12.2010 um 21:37 schrieb Martijn Dashorst:
> On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 9:32 PM, Martin Funk
> wrote:
>> The other projects bes
texas style :-)
Am 16.12.2010 um 21:55 schrieb Jeremy Thomerson:
> +1 for moving everything. this needs to be "all or nothing"
>
> On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 2:37 PM, Martijn Dashorst <
> martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 9:32 PM, Martin Funk
>> wrote:
>>> The other
+1 for moving everything. this needs to be "all or nothing"
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 2:37 PM, Martijn Dashorst <
martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 9:32 PM, Martin Funk
> wrote:
> > The other projects besides the core project I'd leave were they are. If
> someone comes
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 9:32 PM, Martin Funk wrote:
> The other projects besides the core project I'd leave were they are. If
> someone comes up with the will to maintain them a way will be found for
> migration.
I'd rather move everything over, so there's no confusion where the
source lives. I
+1
for the easy approach.
It is not that huge of a project that it needs to be split up in modules or so.
In fact I'd only migrate wicketstuff-core, something like I did about a year
ago.
https://github.com/wicketpit/wicketstuff-core
But ended up in having no fun in merging the new commits that
This sounds very workable to me.
On Dec 16, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Jeremy Thomerson wrote:
> As long as we're top-posting with radical ideas, I'll do the same:
>
> We could adopt a linux-like model
>
> - We host one repo that has all the projects in it.
> - You want to create a wicketstuff proj
As long as we're top-posting with radical ideas, I'll do the same:
We could adopt a linux-like model
- We host one repo that has all the projects in it.
- You want to create a wicketstuff project, you fork it and create your own
directory in the source tree (either under ws-core or not - your
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 5:38 PM, Martijn Dashorst
wrote:
> For the migration of the repository including history we could follow
> this guide:
>
> http://www.17od.com/2010/11/11/migrating-a-sourceforge-subversion-repository-to-github/
>
For reference this page from github provides additional guid
For the migration of the repository including history we could follow
this guide:
http://www.17od.com/2010/11/11/migrating-a-sourceforge-subversion-repository-to-github/
Martijn
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 5:22 PM, Martin Grigorov wrote:
> for wiki each project can have its own README.md in its ro
for wiki each project can have its own README.md in its root folder ...
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 5:21 PM, Martin Grigorov wrote:
> the gain is in issue tracker and wiki
>
> each repo has its own issues
> with all-in-one the maintainer will have to look in all issues to check
> whether there is som
the gain is in issue tracker and wiki
each repo has its own issues
with all-in-one the maintainer will have to look in all issues to check
whether there is something for her project(s)
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 5:18 PM, Igor Vaynberg wrote:
> what would be the point of having them as submodules? i
what would be the point of having them as submodules? it gains nothing
but pain. since all projects need to be released at once the simplest
way is to keep them in a single source tree.
-igor
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 6:15 PM, Martin Grigorov wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 5:04 PM, Martijn Dasho
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 5:04 PM, Martijn Dashorst <
martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've claimed an organization for Wicket Stuff:
> https://github.com/wicketstuff and we can create multiple repos under
> that, and create and assign different teams to the repositories. How
> we organize thing
i think keeping things in the same repo is the easiest, it also allows
us to use github's built in svn repo import function.
-igor
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 6:04 PM, Martijn Dashorst
wrote:
> I've claimed an organization for Wicket Stuff:
> https://github.com/wicketstuff and we can create multiple
I've claimed an organization for Wicket Stuff:
https://github.com/wicketstuff and we can create multiple repos under
that, and create and assign different teams to the repositories. How
we organize things is just a matter of this debate ;)
I have put a redirect from apache extras -> wicket stuff -
33 matches
Mail list logo
