On 22 March 2018 at 17:17, Even Rouault wrote:
>
> I've prototyped what should be the new repository (baring any new commits in
> the meantime) and
> put it temporarily at https://github.com/rouault/gdal_wip
>
> You can check if branches, tags etc look good. I've removed a few useless
> branches
Hi,
I've prototyped what should be the new repository (baring any new commits in
the meantime) and
put it temporarily at https://github.com/rouault/gdal_wip
You can check if branches, tags etc look good. I've removed a few useless
branches and tags.
Branches are named release/{major}.{minor} an
On 20/03/18 00:25, Even Rouault wrote:
> A more complicated version of the above is that we would migrate only the
> open
> Trac tickets to github (so < 600 instead of 6000). And we would add in each
> open Trac ticket a message like "This ticket has been migated to https://
> github.com/OSGeo/
On 20/03/18 00:25, Even Rouault wrote:
> I actually discussed about that with Howard yesterday, and he suggested an
> even easier and least-effort solution. Do we actually need to migrate the
> existing Trac ticket database to github ?
This brings up another thing I have been wondering about: w
On 19 March 2018 at 18:14, Even Rouault wrote:
>>> 3) Close all Trac tickets with assignment to a "closed-before-github-
>>> migration" milestone, and a message "Issue reporting has now been migrated
>>> >to
>> https://github.com/OSGeo/gdal/issues...";
>>
>>I guess, you mean manual action
>
> Man
Mateuze,
Answering several of your points of your last emails;
>> 3) Close all Trac tickets with assignment to a "closed-before-github-
>> migration" milestone, and a message "Issue reporting has now been migrated
>> >to
> https://github.com/OSGeo/gdal/issues...";
>
>I guess, you mean manual act
On 19 March 2018 at 17:42, Even Rouault wrote:
> Regarding my point 1), I've experimented locally on my git clone to rewrite
> references
> to Trac tickets like "fix #1234" to become "fix
> https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/ticket/1234";
Looks good.
> with
>
> git filter-branch -f --msg-filter 'pyth
On 19 March 2018 at 14:25, Even Rouault wrote:
> I actually discussed about that with Howard yesterday, and he suggested an
> even easier and least-effort solution. Do we actually need to migrate the
> existing Trac ticket database to github ?
I'm glad Howard came up with suggestion to simplify :
On 19 March 2018 at 15:15, Even Rouault wrote:
> On lundi 19 mars 2018 14:55:14 CET Tamas Szekeres wrote:
>> I don't think the trac tickets should be closed automatically. The ticket
>> owners should decide either to close (with a meaningful comment) or copy
>> it's variant to github if necessary.
Regarding my point 1), I've experimented locally on my git clone to rewrite
references
to Trac tickets like "fix #1234" to become "fix
https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/ticket/1234";
with
git filter-branch -f --msg-filter 'python /home/even/rewrite.py' -- trunk
where rewrite.py is
{{{
import sys
m
On lundi 19 mars 2018 14:55:14 CET Tamas Szekeres wrote:
> I don't think the trac tickets should be closed automatically. The ticket
> owners should decide either to close (with a meaningful comment) or copy
> it's variant to github if necessary.
> I'm fine with option #2 and #4 and preserving/upda
I don't think the trac tickets should be closed automatically. The ticket
owners should decide either to close (with a meaningful comment) or copy
it's variant to github if necessary.
I'm fine with option #2 and #4 and preserving/updating the history would be
a plus, but not a necessary requirement
Hi,
Adding gdal-dev into the loop to get more feedback.
I actually discussed about that with Howard yesterday, and he suggested an
even easier and least-effort solution. Do we actually need to migrate the
existing Trac ticket database to github ?
If not, we could just freeze Trac as read-only
13 matches
Mail list logo
