Yea I think so. Just convert it into one git repo and then split and
rearrange the repo in git.
Ian
On Fri, Oct 6, 2017, 03:46 John Lawlor wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Say you have a folder in SVN, let's call it 'Analytics', and it contains 2
> sub-directories called Mobinil and MobinilUseCases.
>
> You de
I
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 9:45 AM, Dave Abrahams wrote:
>
> Hi Ian,
>
> Thanks for answering, but I'm afraid I don't understand how your
> response addresses my question. You're showing me a rule that doesn't
> end in a slash, that supposedly worked. Are you saying that the
> ends-in-a-slash rul
>From kdelibs-rules (located at git://anongit.kde.org/kde-ruleset)
match
/trunk/playground/libs/webkitkde/(kwebpage.*|network/kwebview.*|searchbar.*)
repository KDE/kdelibs
prefix kdewebkit/\1
branch master
max revision 851084
end match
Of course that was done a couple years ago.
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> while there are a few (well, two) more steps to take into account,
> gerrit's review-only mode inherently catches most screwups before they
> hit the repository, and consequently contributes to a less scary
> learning experience.
This wa
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Marco Martin wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> For Frameworks5 we are looking into doing to plasma something similar to what
> happened to nepomuk:
>
> split the "plasma" subdirectory of kdelibs in a separate repository, plus
> moving there also the parts related to plasma the
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 1:25 PM, Jan Kundrát wrote:
> Hi,
> I'd like to start a discussion about integrating the reviews and git more
> tightly. In particular, what I dislike about the reviewboard is that as a
> project maintainer, I have to carry the patches by hand and that the web
> interface h
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Friedrich W. H. Kossebau
wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 30. Mai 2012, 12:41:13 schrieb Josef Weidendorfer:
>> How to handle kdesdk/debian?
well they will have to redo it all anyways won't they? With the build
system changes and possibly new tarballs if you are doing that.
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 5:22 PM, Friedrich W. H. Kossebau
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> currently it is planned to split the kdesdk into several git repos.
> Just, the split would not simply be done by the existing submodules/toplevel
> dirs.
>
> While it would be simple for all the big programs (umbrello, kom
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 15:12, Johannes Sixt wrote:
> Am 9/5/2011 14:53, schrieb Ian Monroe:
>> On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 14:01, Valentin Rusu wrote:
>>> On 09/04/2011 07:25 PM, Mathias Kraus wrote:
>>>> On Sonntag, 4. September 2011 14:11:37 Stefan Majewsky wrote:
On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 14:01, Valentin Rusu wrote:
> On 09/04/2011 07:25 PM, Mathias Kraus wrote:
>> On Sonntag, 4. September 2011 14:11:37 Stefan Majewsky wrote:
>>> Hi folks,
>>>
>>> I think it should be clear that we need to move to git somewhen, and
>>> it is well known that I think it should
On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 13:21, Michael Jansen wrote:
> On Monday, August 08, 2011 12:39:02 PM Marcel Wiesweg wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have been fixing branches of SoK students, removing some dirty manual
>> merges and branch mixups, by interactive rebase.
>> I'm fully aware of the implications of rewr
On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 11:35, Raphael Kubo da Costa wrote:
> On Thursday 23 June 2011 14:13:01 Ian Monroe wrote:
> > I'm thinking we should have a KDE Git transition BoF. One thought is that
> > the Git BoF happen after the release team BoF so that they can be given
> the
I'm thinking we should have a KDE Git transition BoF. One thought is that
the Git BoF happen after the release team BoF so that they can be given the
opportunity to add stuff to our agenda.
I could use another co-host, anyone want to help?
Ian
___
Kde-s
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 06:56, Stefan Majewsky
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> what is the technical procedure for moving libtagaro.git to kdereview?
> I think sysadmins need be informed, and hope that those are reading
> here.
>
> Assuming that this goes well: I hereby propose to move libtagaro to
> the kdegame
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 14:34, Sebastian Stein wrote:
> Ian Monroe [110404 19:50]:
>> Enjoy. :)
>>
>> The 4.6 branch and master will now be developed in Git. SVN is locked
>> read-only.
>
> That is really great news!
>
> But now starts the trouble: How do w
2011/3/28 Sebastian Dörner :
> Hi,
>
> KDESDK is still using svn up to now and there doesn't seem to be much
> progress to make the transition for the whole repository. Also see the
> brief discussion on December 18th on kde-scm-interest.
> I guess one of the reasons is that KDESDK is rather an ens
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 12:24, Tom Albers wrote:
> - Original Message -
>> On Thursday 24 March 2011 15.42.28 Gilles Caulier wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > I would to move wikimedia kipi-plugin source code from this place :
>> >
>> > https://projects.kde.org/projects/playground/base/silk/re
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 12:16, Torgny Nyblom wrote:
> On Thursday 24 March 2011 15.42.28 Gilles Caulier wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I would to move wikimedia kipi-plugin source code from this place :
>>
>> https://projects.kde.org/projects/playground/base/silk/repository/revisions/
>> master/show/medi
On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 16:31, Stefan Majewsky
wrote:
> [crosspost kde-games-devel + kde-scm-interest]
>
> Heya,
>
> I've been thinking about the Git move again. I'm still in favor of the
> monolithic approach for organizational reasons, e.g. I really like
> Aaron's argument that a single repo make
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 18:44, Stephen Kelly wrote:
> Andreas Pakulat wrote:
>
>> On 16.02.11 00:12:16, Stephen Kelly wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I've added a section for proposed workflows. I think eean wants to create
>>> a couple of proposals too.
>>>
>>> http://community.kde.org/20110213_GitWorkflo
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 07:07, Daniel Laidig wrote:
> Hi,
>
> thanks for working on this! :)
>
> I just took a look at the parley repo and the first thing i noticed is that
> the parley practice and soc branches are still missing.
>
> This was something I already noticed in the repositories created
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 10:55, Alexander Neundorf wrote:
> On Tuesday 08 February 2011, Boudewijn Rempt wrote:
>> On Tuesday 08 February 2011, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
>> > > - just throw away the merge with git reset --hard HEAD~1 and redo it
>> > > after git pull-ing. preferably, you should ha
s one qwidget which
> seems to be a qt solution copy. I don't know if anyone is using it.
>
> Cheers,
> Frederik
>
> (and thanks!)
>
> On Monday 7. February 2011 23.35.56 Ian Monroe wrote:
>> I've only done a basic look over on each repo (looked at branches,
>&g
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 16:56, Aleix Pol wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 11:35 PM, Ian Monroe wrote:
>>
>> I've only done a basic look over on each repo (looked at branches,
>> made sure each only had one parentless commit), plan on doing more
>> tonight. But rea
I've only done a basic look over on each repo (looked at branches,
made sure each only had one parentless commit), plan on doing more
tonight. But really it helps to know the history of the code to know
if everything looks right. Also if folks could do build tests that
would be helpful.
The repos
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 13:44, Torgny Nyblom wrote:
> On Monday 07 February 2011 10.32.47 Ian Monroe wrote:
>> I could use another pair of eyes to help diagnose what is going wrong
>> with most of the kdeedu repository conversions. They crash on:
>> "fatal: Invalid r
I could use another pair of eyes to help diagnose what is going wrong
with most of the kdeedu repository conversions. They crash on:
"fatal: Invalid ref name or SHA1 expression: refs/tags/v4.6.0"
but when I go through and look at the logs, everything seems to be
fine. The logs talk about creating a
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 03:48, Will Stephenson wrote:
> On Friday 04 February 2011 09:52:09 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
>> A Divendres, 4 de febrer de 2011, Will Stephenson va escriure:
>> > I notice that the remote branches for kdepimlibs and plasma-addons do not
>> > have the "KDE/" prefix for the "
So thanks to everyone's patience with some of this issues this
weekend. I want to thank KO for their sponsorship and we all should
thank Nicolás Alvarez (PovAddict), as he is responsible for
significant size reductions in the repositories (probably about
~100mb/main repo on average).
Now that the
de-runtime, kdelibs).
git://anongit.kde.org/scratch/nalvarez/kdelibs-convtest
git://anongit.kde.org/scratch/ianmonroe/kdebase-apps
git://anongit.kde.org/scratch/ianmonroe/kdebase-runtime
git://anongit.kde.org/scratch/ianmonroe/kdebase-workspace
git://anongit.kde.org/scratch/ianmonroe/konsole
T
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 09:46, Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> On 13.01.11 08:01:05, Ian Monroe wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 03:11, Esben Mose Hansen wrote:
>> > On Wednesday 12 January 2011 15:28:38 Marcel Wiesweg wrote:
>> >> a) should CMake modules be move
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 03:11, Esben Mose Hansen wrote:
> On Wednesday 12 January 2011 15:28:38 Marcel Wiesweg wrote:
>> a) should CMake modules be moved up to kdelibs or down to the submodule
>> that needs them?
>
> Instead of uusing CMake modules, I have great experiences with using the
> cmake
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 09:38, Eike Hein wrote:
> On 1/12/2011 4:23 PM, Pau Garcia i Quiles wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 1:37 PM, Marcel Wiesweg
>> wrote:
>>
>>> d) may contain a convenience script to pull all repos
>>
>> Please, do not forget about Windows. Meaning: providing only a
>> bou
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 08:28, Marcel Wiesweg wrote:
>
>> Then why split at all? All your points above suggest that having a split
>> repository has no benefit for you and its unclear wether it'll ever have
>> any benefit.
>
> I left out the points why splitting is a benefit and collected only
> t
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 06:37, Marcel Wiesweg wrote:
> Hi,
>
> we are now internally discussing the kdegraphics git move with all interested
> and involved developers.
> Some technical questions that arose, given we take the split repo approach:
>
> 1) Would it be suitable to have a shallow shell
KDE Bindings 4.7 has moved to Git. Hooray!
You can browse through the projects at:
https://projects.kde.org/projects/kde/kdebindings
4.6 will continue to be developed in SVN.
We still need to update some docs on Techbase and such.
Thanks,
Ian
___
Kde-
Just to be clear from the start, this is only for 4.7 and not 4.6.
Nothing has changed for 4.6; it will continue to be developed in SVN.
The main thinking behind this split is to make the dependency tree
clearer. Before there was a cmake-time dependency on KDE. This
resulted in some very real conf
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 09:18, Marcel Wiesweg wrote:
>
>> The initial idea from the Digikam people was to have 1 repository with:
>> - digikam
>> - kipi-plugins
>> - libkface
>> - libkdcraw
>> - libkexiv2
>> in the very same repository.
>>
>> That's what we have indicated that was a bad idea.
>>
>
On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 17:45, Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> A Dilluns, 27 de desembre de 2010, vàreu escriure:
>> On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 00:11, Albert Astals Cid wrote:
>> > A Dilluns, 27 de desembre de 2010, Marcel Wiesweg va escriure:
>> >> > I read your mail and sincerely it seemed like "we scr
- Original message -
> Hi,
>
> we are working on digikam's git migration and would like to migrate soon.
> The problem is our interdependency with libkexiv2, libkdcraw and libkipi
> from kdegraphics/libs. In fact, there are branches for these libs in
> extragear, so digikam cannot migr
On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 11:55, Mark Kretschmann wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 6:48 PM, Torgny Nyblom wrote:
>> On Sun, 19 Dec 2010 18:39:52 +0100
>> Mark Kretschmann wrote:
>>
>>> Hey folks,
>>>
>>> I have a small request regarding git.kde.org, it resulted from a
>>> discussion with Chani:
>>
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 18:22, Ian Monroe wrote:
> So kdelibs and kdebase are switching to Git, probably not Dec 20/21 as
> was previously thought, but at the release of 4.6.0.
>
> Whether its next week or next month though, its pretty soon. :)
>
> I have three work-in-progres
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 02:26, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 06:22:38PM -0600, Ian Monroe wrote:
>> The branches (especially the early CVS ones) are a bit confused, this
>> is a work-in-progress.
>
>> cvs2svn has some known issues I think,
>>
VN log did even. The branches
(especially the early CVS ones) are a bit confused, this is a
work-in-progress. cvs2svn has some known issues I think, but we'll do
our best.
The only repo I have left to start is kdebase-apps.
Thanks for any feedback
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 8:08 AM, Niko Sams wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 21:37, Anne-Marie Mahfouf
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am starting to feel quite anxious about the git migration as kdeedu has no
>> rules except for Marble. Which already makes me ask:
>> when main modules will move, will they
2010/12/6 Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. :
> In , Ian Monroe
> wrote:
>>2010/12/6 Thiago Macieira :
>>> git-fast-import produces very poorly-packed repositories. Repacking is a
>>> must to reduce the size.
>>
>>git gc --aggressive seem to do a great job. repacki
2010/12/6 Thiago Macieira :
> Em Segunda-feira, 6 de Dezembro de 2010, às 15:54:55, Ian Monroe escreveu:
>> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 1:01 AM, Johannes Sixt wrote:
>> > Am 12/5/2010 23:03, schrieb Ian Monroe:
>> >> On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 4:01 PM, John Tapsell wrote:
&
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 1:01 AM, Johannes Sixt wrote:
> Am 12/5/2010 23:03, schrieb Ian Monroe:
>> On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 4:01 PM, John Tapsell wrote:
>>> On 5 December 2010 14:12, Ian Monroe wrote:
>>>> [250mb]
>>
>> That's just the .git.
>
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 4:01 PM, John Tapsell wrote:
> On 5 December 2010 14:12, Ian Monroe wrote:
>> I'm of exactly the same opinion. The whole of kdelibs is 250mb
>
> Is that the size of just the .git directory, or includes the checked
> out kdelibs?
>
> How big i
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 9:18 AM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 05-12-2010 10:15, Dominik Haumann wrote:
>> On Sunday, 5. December 2010, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote:
>>> On Sun, Dec 05, 2010 at 02:26:52AM +, Tom Albers wrote:
> On Sat
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 5:27 AM, Christoph Cullmann wrote:
> On Sunday 05 December 2010 05:30:53 Ian Monroe wrote:
>> I've done a trial run of a kdelibs git conversion and published it here:
>> http://gitweb.kde.org/scratch/ianmonroe/kdelibs-test.git
>> It should h
sue is what the Kate folks are
planning, though I don't believe it should affect the git conversion.
Thanks,
Ian Monroe
___
Kde-scm-interest mailing list
Kde-scm-interest@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-scm-interest
On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 7:05 PM, Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> Hi Ian, I'm not sure wether you're aware of the previous discussions
> about this or not, but the kate devs would like to remove at least the
> kate-dir from kdelibs when it moves to git (as kate has a separate
> repository with ktexteditor-
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 12:35 PM, Torgny Nyblom wrote:
> On Friday 03 December 2010 09.11.48 Ian Monroe wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 7:58 AM, Eike Hein wrote:
>> > On 12/3/2010 2:54 PM, Boudewijn Rempt wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> Just a
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 7:58 AM, Eike Hein wrote:
> On 12/3/2010 2:54 PM, Boudewijn Rempt wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Just a heads-up: KO GmbH has decided to sponsor Ian Monroe to create the
>> svn2git conversion rules for kdelibs and kdebase. Ian's told us that he'll
- Original message -
> On Monday 22 November 2010 18.47.10 Arno Rehn wrote:
> > On Monday 22 November 2010 18:29:20 Torgny Nyblom wrote:
> [...]
> > > Also as Niko said if you are planning on splitting the kdebindings
> > > module
> > > into it's different languages the git migration would
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 4:16 AM, Torgny Nyblom wrote:
> On Thursday 18 November 2010 10.24.20 Niko Sams wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 09:07, Cornelius Schumacher
> wrote:
>> > Is there an experimental git repo of kdelibs already somewhere? Nothing
>> > to actually work with for developing kde
2010/10/27 Chani :
> hey, maybe this is a crazy idea, but could we get students to do a few chunks
> of the svn2git rules?
> http://community.kde.org/GoogleCodeIn/2010/Ideas
>
Do you hate children?
:D
(actually its not a bad idea)
Ian
___
Kde-scm-inte
2010/9/23 Jason A. Donenfeld :
> Hello,
> Regarding the issue of managing multiple little repositories when working on
> an entire module, if we decide to go with the (preferred) split approach,
> has anyone considered the potential of git-submodule? I've used it for
> exactly this purpose and have
On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 13:06, Chani wrote:
>>
>> so as much as I hate to discourage work... writing split-layout rules is a
>> bit
>> premature at this point. :)
>
> The act of writing the rules might help considerably in working out
On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 10:46 AM, Thomas Zander wrote:
> On Friday 10. September 2010 17.21.13 Arno Rehn wrote:
>> On Friday 10 September 2010 17:00:09 Niko Sams wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > as the major issue with the split repository layout are the missing
>> > conversion rules,
>> > i'd like to co
On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 10:00 AM, Niko Sams wrote:
> Hi,
>
> as the major issue with the split repository layout are the missing
> conversion rules,
> i'd like to contribute some rules. I wanted to start with kdeedu.
>
> The question I have is how proceed with those kdeedu subdirectories:
> cmake/
On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 5:48 AM, Arno Rehn wrote:
> On Tuesday 07 September 2010 18:04:40 Tom Albers wrote:
>> Dear Scm-interest,
>>
>> As promised, the people behind the sysadmin team would like to give advice
>> regarding the monolithic vs split repositories issues. We have tried to
>> stay away
On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 4:55 PM, Tom Albers wrote:
>
> On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 14:03:23 -0700, Chani wrote:
>> I've attempted to summarize this thread (plus a couple of irc comments)
>> here:
>> http://techbase.kde.org/Projects/MoveToGit/Layout
>>
>> I'm sure I've missed a thing or two, so if you had p
On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Chani wrote:
> I've attempted to summarize this thread (plus a couple of irc comments) here:
> http://techbase.kde.org/Projects/MoveToGit/Layout
>
> I'm sure I've missed a thing or two, so if you had points to make, please go
> check that page and add them if they'r
On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 7:34 AM, Tom Albers wrote:
> Again, we advise you to go for a split approach, if the list does not want
> that, it is fine. Just solve the problems we address in the document and
> accept the technical consequences it will have. To turn this around: don't
> discourage us to
On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 8:41 AM, Torgny Nyblom wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 08:26:46 -0500
> Ian Monroe wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 5:59 AM, Torgny Nyblom wrote:
> [...]
>
>> > Why would this be easier? Use these rules in the above context but
>> >
On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 5:59 AM, Torgny Nyblom wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 15:03:39 -0500
> Ian Monroe wrote:
>
> [...]
>> AFAIK, its impossible to have svn2git rules for a monolithic repo like
>> KDE Multimedia with submodules like Dragon Player produce complete
>&
2010/9/7 Maciej Mrozowski :
> Thanks for investigation!
>
> I'd like to address some points, actually the one that monolithic layout
> breaks current application life cycle/workflow.
>
> It doesn't have to.
> Provided we forget about extragear or playground being actual repositories. If
> said plac
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 2:42 PM, Arno Rehn wrote:
> On Tuesday 07 September 2010 21:09:12 Ian Monroe wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 1:20 PM, Torgny Nyblom wrote:
>> > I agree that this makes the most sense, but I wonder how the kdepim
>> > module(s) (and others?) shou
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 2:35 PM, Tom Albers wrote:
>
> On Tue, 7 Sep 2010 14:09:12 -0500, Ian Monroe wrote:
>> One thing that is missing from the proposed solution is a way to keep
>> an up-to-date checkout of 'kdereview' or 'kdegames'. It's not a
>
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 1:20 PM, Torgny Nyblom wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Sep 2010 18:04:40 +0200
> Tom Albers wrote:
>
>> Dear Scm-interest,
>>
>> As promised, the people behind the sysadmin team would like to give
>> advice regarding the monolithic vs split repositories issues. We have
>> tried to stay
On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 11:22 AM, Eike Hein wrote:
> On 08/19/2010 04:39 PM, Arno Rehn wrote:
>> Well, I was just seeing that amarok and konversation have already been moved
>> there. So I thought that moving another project wouldn't be a problem.
>> Looking
>> at the git infrastructure launch ar
On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 11:48 AM, Richard Dale
wrote:
> On Thursday, August 19, 2010 05:31:35 pm Thomas Zander wrote:
>> On Thursday 19. August 2010 18.00.32 Matt Williams wrote:
>> > I would say that in this situation, they're a good candidate for
>> > splitting out into a separate module called
On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Arno Rehn wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> I know that splitting the monolithic KDE modules into different git-repos has
> been discussed a thousand times here and that you're probably pretty much fed
> up with it. However I have to bring it up again:
>
> With KDE bindings
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 12:42 PM, Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> A Diumenge, 27 de juny de 2010, Ian Monroe va escriure:
>> >
>> > But this gets complicated when all apps are into one big module based
>> > repository. Moving KMail from kdepim to extragear would not be
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 12:22 PM, Tom Albers wrote:
>
> On Sun, 27 Jun 2010 09:48:32 -0700, Chani wrote:
>> every single time the matter was brought up, the end was the same. so
>> anyone
>> who wants to comment further on this thread: please, *please* go read
> the
>> archives first.
>
> Ok, but
2010/6/9 Eike Hein :
> Hi,
>
> as all of you know, over the past several months the board of KDE
> e.V., on behalf of the KDE community, has been in negotiations with
> Shortcut AS to investigate the possibility of KDE hosting its full
> set of planned Git repositories on Shortcut's Gitorious.org p
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 2:44 AM, Esben Mose Hansen wrote:
> On Thursday 10 June 2010 02:26:06 Eike Hein wrote:
>> We're sharing it with you now - see the attachments to this mail -
>> and hope you will agree that we have found a solid way forward for
>> the KDE Git migration efforts.
>
> Thank you
2010/5/11 Jeff Mitchell :
[snip]
> At this point, if I had to pick a solution for us, I'd say Gitolite +
> Redmine, with migration of our Bugzilla over to Redmine. I think this
> provides a pretty nice capability, allowing each project to have its own
> issues, wiki, news, repository, and so on yet
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 8:13 AM, Esben Mose Hansen wrote:
> On Tuesday 11 May 2010 21:29:47 Jeff Mitchell wrote:
>> This all said, we discussed a few alternatives in #kde-git and I was
>> asked to put them on this list for discussion:
>
> I know this is probably a stupid question, but since I can'
2010/3/28 ComputerDruid :
> On Sunday 28 March 2010 20:05:22 Ian Monroe wrote:
>> Yea I guess I was. Many projects will want to have multiple
>> repositories, or at least the option to have them, in a commons.
>> Useful for feature branches or for old historic branches. You
On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 5:52 PM, Cornelius Schumacher
wrote:
> On Monday 29 March 2010 Ian Monroe wrote:
>>
>> As far as I know, the 'layout' on Gitorious will be entirely flat. So
>> I don't really understand what you're talking about.
>
> Every r
2010/3/28 Cornelius Schumacher :
> On Sunday 28 March 2010 Thomas Zander wrote:
>>
>> $ git clone git://gitorious.org/svn2git/kde-ruleset.git
>> $ grep 'create repository' kde-ruleset/*
>>
>> Each of those lines will be its own project with one or more repositories.
>
> Attached is the slighthly ed
On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 8:17 AM, Cornelius Schumacher
wrote:
> What's the plan for laying out projects and repositories on gitorious? The
> currently migrated projects seem to use top-level projects and the kde project
> doesn't contain any repositories? Is this the way to go or will there be some
On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 7:55 PM, Cornelius Schumacher wrote:
> I would like to convert the kode module from playground/pim to git. It's more
> or less an independent module, which could live just anywhere, so I'd like to
> do that independent of the grand KDE git migration.
>
> Question is how do I
On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 3:42 PM, Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> Hi,
>
> for those concerned about KDE breaking apart between svn and git, don't
> worry this is not about kdevelop. Its about one of the tools some of our
> plugins use. Namely kdevelop-pg-qt, residing in playground.
>
> This one has a very
2010/3/1 Chani :
> what defines the list of projects on http://gitorious.org/+kde-developers ?
> I notice it has kate, but not rekonq, and they appear to be listed in no
> particular order.
>
> I'm just wondering about it, because I was thinking someday we'll want a nice
> pretty organized list, wi
2010/2/27 Thiago Macieira :
> Without an example, we can't tell. And you can simply delete useless things at
> the end of the import.
Just thought I'd add that if you do something like this, to be sure to
documented via a script file or something uploaded to kde-ruleset so
that we can have "The Sw
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 5:30 PM, Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> On 25.02.10 23:28:43, Eike Hein wrote:
>> On 2/25/2010 10:45 PM, Andreas Pakulat wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I've started to play with svn2git for converting kdevelop/kdevplatform.
>> > Unfortunately svn-all-fast-export crashes relatively ear
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 8:06 AM, Ian Monroe wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 8:00 AM, Thomas Zander wrote:
>> On Tuesday 23. February 2010 14.46.12 Ian Monroe wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 6:37 AM, Thomas Zander wrote:
>>> > On Monday 22. February 2010 23.37.2
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 8:00 AM, Thomas Zander wrote:
> On Tuesday 23. February 2010 14.46.12 Ian Monroe wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 6:37 AM, Thomas Zander wrote:
>> > On Monday 22. February 2010 23.37.24 Ian Monroe wrote:
>> >> I'm getting
>> >
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 6:37 AM, Thomas Zander wrote:
> On Monday 22. February 2010 23.37.24 Ian Monroe wrote:
>> I'm getting
>> $ svn log -v -r950717 file:///mnt/tera/kde-svn/kde/
>> svn: Revision file lacks trailing newline
>>
>> This obviously blocks svn2g
I'm getting
$ svn log -v -r950717 file:///mnt/tera/kde-svn/kde/
svn: Revision file lacks trailing newline
This obviously blocks svn2git from doing its job.
` svn log -v -r950717 svn+ssh://ianmon...@svn.kde.org/home/kde` works just fine.
Any ideas?
Ian
___
I've started a wiki page with the idea that people will post tips and
instructions on how to write svn2git import rules.
http://gitorious.org/svn2git/pages/How%20to%20Write%20KDE%20svn2git%20Import%20Rules
Ian
___
Kde-scm-interest mailing list
Kde-scm-in
Mostly in the interest of documentation, I've written a small
automation script and published the hooks currently used for Amarok,
Konversation, & Phonon.
http://gitorious.org/remotehook/remotehook
Ian
___
Kde-scm-interest mailing list
Kde-scm-interest@
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Dmitry Suzdalev wrote:
> On Friday 12 February 2010 17:33:23 Esben Mose Hansen wrote:
>> Could someone spell out to me why moving parts like KOffice to git hinders
>> (or helps) anything? The only argument I've heard is that using 2 tools
>> raises the bat for dev
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 6:44 AM, Robert Wohlrab wrote:
> Ian Monroe wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 6:35 AM, Robert Wohlrab
> wrote:
>> > Riccardo Iaconelli wrote:
>> >> So, what are we doing now? Giving up on git and telling people to just
>> >&g
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 6:35 AM, Robert Wohlrab wrote:
> Riccardo Iaconelli wrote:
>> So, what are we doing now? Giving up on git and telling people to just
>> screw up and use git-svn? Think more? Hire someone to make a better
>> git? Or what?
>
> No, just implement the narrow transfer protocol a
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 6:18 AM, Robert Wohlrab wrote:
> Riccardo Iaconelli wrote:
>> Hi,
>> so, to recap from last two immense threads (not counting KOffice one
>> now), seems like we're stuck between two situations:
>>
>> - Not splitting the main modules. Would work great but will fail once
>> w
1 - 100 of 193 matches
Mail list logo
