Re: wicketst...@github: re-organize now or later?

2010-12-31 Thread Igor Vaynberg
mike, do you want to craft an announcement to user@ and explain the new structure, etc. that way people will know we are good to go. active committers can also start requesting push access. i have created a "committers" team in our github org for them. -igor On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 12:55 PM, Mic

Re: wicketst...@github: re-organize now or later?

2010-12-31 Thread Michael O'Cleirigh
Hi Igor, Yes, I think everything is good to go now Mike so are we good to go now import-wise? -igor On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 7:13 PM, Michael O'Cleirigh wrote: I was able to add in a remote to the wicketstuff-core-1.4 branch from the first import and then use git cherry-pick to pull in eac

Re: wicketst...@github: re-organize now or later?

2010-12-31 Thread Igor Vaynberg
so are we good to go now import-wise? -igor On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 7:13 PM, Michael O'Cleirigh wrote: > I was able to add in a remote to the wicketstuff-core-1.4 branch from the > first import and then use git cherry-pick to pull in each of the 11 commits > that had occurred since the 1.4.14 re

Re: wicketst...@github: re-organize now or later?

2010-12-30 Thread Michael O'Cleirigh
I was able to add in a remote to the wicketstuff-core-1.4 branch from the first import and then use git cherry-pick to pull in each of the 11 commits that had occurred since the 1.4.14 release tag was applied. I've pushed my changes into the wicketstuff/core repository. This should build the

Re: wicketst...@github: re-organize now or later?

2010-12-30 Thread Michael O'Cleirigh
There are a 11 commits that were done since 1.4.14. They are contained in the test import (first one) which I have checked out here. I will try to cherry-pick them back and commit them into the core-1.4.x branch. I'll update the list when it is done. Mike i was able to restore it off the

Re: wicketst...@github: re-organize now or later?

2010-12-29 Thread Igor Vaynberg
i was able to restore it off the 1.4.14 release tag. hopefully there havent been commits in the interim. -igor 2010/12/29 Major Péter : > I think the wicketstuff-core-1.4 branch got lost, the core project now only > has the 1.5-SNAPSHOT stuff, at least that branch should be restored IMHO. > > Tha

Re: wicketst...@github: re-organize now or later?

2010-12-29 Thread Major Péter
I think the wicketstuff-core-1.4 branch got lost, the core project now only has the 1.5-SNAPSHOT stuff, at least that branch should be restored IMHO. Thanks, Peter 2010-12-29 22:50 keltezéssel, Igor Vaynberg írta: i think i got them split. core is already pushed, sandbox is incoming. we lost

Re: wicketst...@github: re-organize now or later?

2010-12-29 Thread Igor Vaynberg
i think i got them split. core is already pushed, sandbox is incoming. we lost branches in the process, i dont think this is a big deal since they were mostly used as tags to mark releases. on the other hand i converted release branches to tags before i did the split, and those seemed to stick aro

Re: wicketst...@github: re-organize now or later?

2010-12-29 Thread Martijn Dashorst
Great, I won't be of much help as I left my laptop at work due to a mishap with my car (apparent broken battery) and needing to entertain the AAA guy. Martijn On Wednesday, December 29, 2010, Igor Vaynberg wrote: > i will play around with splitting and we can see what happens > > -igor > > On We

Re: wicketst...@github: re-organize now or later?

2010-12-29 Thread Igor Vaynberg
i will play around with splitting and we can see what happens -igor On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 10:04 AM, James Carman wrote: > +1 > On Dec 29, 2010 12:49 PM, "Igor Vaynberg" wrote: >> i think core and sandbox are probably better names and more clearly >> communicate the intent. >> >> -igor >> >> O

Re: wicketst...@github: re-organize now or later?

2010-12-29 Thread James Carman
+1 On Dec 29, 2010 12:49 PM, "Igor Vaynberg" wrote: > i think core and sandbox are probably better names and more clearly > communicate the intent. > > -igor > > On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 9:30 AM, Martijn Dashorst > wrote: >> Currently our wicketstuff repo at github is one gigantic repo >> containi

Re: wicketst...@github: re-organize now or later?

2010-12-29 Thread Jeremy Thomerson
I agree. Jeremy Thomerson http://wickettraining.com -- sent from my "smart" phone, so please excuse spelling, formatting, or compiler errors On Dec 29, 2010 11:49 AM, "Igor Vaynberg" wrote: i think core and sandbox are probably better names and more clearly communicate the intent. -igor On W

Re: wicketst...@github: re-organize now or later?

2010-12-29 Thread Martijn Dashorst
true fact! Martijn On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 6:48 PM, Igor Vaynberg wrote: > i think core and sandbox are probably better names and more clearly > communicate the intent. > > -igor > > On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 9:30 AM, Martijn Dashorst > wrote: >> Currently our wicketstuff repo at github is one gi

Re: wicketst...@github: re-organize now or later?

2010-12-29 Thread Igor Vaynberg
i think core and sandbox are probably better names and more clearly communicate the intent. -igor On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 9:30 AM, Martijn Dashorst wrote: > Currently our wicketstuff repo at github is one gigantic repo > containing everything. I'd like to propose to split the repository > into t

wicketst...@github: re-organize now or later?

2010-12-29 Thread Martijn Dashorst
Currently our wicketstuff repo at github is one gigantic repo containing everything. I'd like to propose to split the repository into two: - github.com/wicketstuff/wicketstuff (containing just the core project) - github.com/wicketstuff/archive (containing all the side projec