(2) hoping to clean out/re-organize now (prior to any such 1 above).
As long as we keep the history of traditional in CVS I don't care
too much whether it gets migrated to SVN at all. It's not as if we'd
remove the CVS module completely, it will just become unused.
I think this is a key
On Mon, 19 Jul 2004, Adam R. B. Jack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1) We ask for a gump tree in SVN [letting them know we'll keep the
gump module in CVS.]
2) We mark tag gump CVS as 'TRADITIONAL'.
3) We remove all the older/unused (traditional) contents, and we
move all Python code to SVN,
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
As long as we keep the history of traditional in CVS I don't care
too much whether it gets migrated to SVN at all. It's not as if we'd
remove the CVS module completely, it will just become unused.
Several people I know here at MIT are working on tools for data
analysis,
Adam R. B. Jack wrote:
(2) hoping to clean out/re-organize now (prior to any such 1 above).
As long as we keep the history of traditional in CVS I don't care
too much whether it gets migrated to SVN at all. It's not as if we'd
remove the CVS module completely, it will just become unused.
I think
my workflow suggestion is:
1) have infra@ migrate the existing gump CVS over to SVN
I assume we have all Apache w/ access to this SVN repository, i.e. same
perms as CVS.
No brainer, but I assume we want:
https://svn.apache.org/repository/gump/
Any other input we give to infr?
Thought I just read on infrastructure that they setup a document on how
to migrate and looking for people who want to do that, so in the light
of your migration experience, maybe it's an option that you can move cvs
over to svn.
Mvgr,
Martin
On Fri, 2004-07-16 at 07:08, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
Martin van den Bemt wrote:
Thought I just read on infrastructure that they setup a document on how
to migrate and looking for people who want to do that, so in the light
of your migration experience, maybe it's an option that you can move cvs
over to svn.
I really don't have time to follow up on
Nicola wrote;
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
...
Ok, what about moving all the code to subversion and just keep the
metadata in CVS? (at least for now)
IIRC that what we had basically agreed was a sensible thing to do for
Python Gump.
+1 from me
Yeah, I think we agree that is the best
Adam R. B. Jack wrote:
Nicola wrote;
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
...
Ok, what about moving all the code to subversion and just keep the
metadata in CVS? (at least for now)
IIRC that what we had basically agreed was a sensible thing to do for
Python Gump.
+1 from me
Yeah, I think we agree that is
Adam R. B. Jack wrote:
All,
We've discussed various ways to separate Traditional from Python, so we can
re-organize directories, clean-up and focus on extensions to the current
base. We've discussed moving Python Gump out to SVN, and we've discussed
moving the metadata to a separate CVS module. I
Go for it.
SVN rulez and it's very well integrated with IDEs now and many apache
projects are moving.
I read this to mean you'd like to see Gump migrated to SVN. I could read
your respones as saying, do my 'CVS branch' step first, since it is a move
in the general directon, but I am guessing
Adam R. B. Jack wrote:
Go for it.
SVN rulez and it's very well integrated with IDEs now and many apache
projects are moving.
I read this to mean you'd like to see Gump migrated to SVN. I could read
your respones as saying, do my 'CVS branch' step first, since it is a move
in the general directon,
12 matches
Mail list logo
