[Kde-scm-interest] Re: Usage of pull rebasing and merges

2011-02-09 Thread John Tapsell
2011/2/9 Michael Pyne : > On Wednesday, February 09, 2011 02:16:44 John Tapsell wrote: >> Why does that require you to have a separate branch locally? Just >> don't push upstream until you're ready. Or only push to your clone. > > Having other people use the softw

[Kde-scm-interest] Re: Usage of pull rebasing and merges

2011-02-09 Thread John Tapsell
merge>On 9 February 2011 07:50, Johannes Sixt wrote: > The second drawback has to do with efficient testing, and it is much more > serious, IMO. When you make a series of changes, you are expected to > ensure that each individual change is self-contained and passes tests. > I.e., after N commits,

[Kde-scm-interest] Re: Usage of pull rebasing and merges

2011-02-08 Thread John Tapsell
2011/2/9 Michael Pyne : > On Tuesday, February 08, 2011 14:04:14 John Tapsell wrote: >> On 8 February 2011 18:27, Ian Monroe wrote: >> > On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 10:55, Alexander Neundorf wrote: >> >> On Tuesday 08 February 2011, Boudewijn Rempt wrote: >> >

[Kde-scm-interest] Re: Usage of pull rebasing and merges

2011-02-08 Thread John Tapsell
On 8 February 2011 18:27, Ian Monroe wrote: > 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 >>>

[Kde-scm-interest] Re: Trial run of the kdelibs git

2010-12-05 Thread John Tapsell
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 is it just for the checked out files? John ___ Kde-s

Re: [Kde-scm-interest] Have we arrived to a dead end?

2010-02-20 Thread John Tapsell
On 20 February 2010 17:26, Thomas Zander wrote: > On Saturday 20. February 2010 17.25.05 Eike Hein wrote: >> On 02/20/2010 05:19 PM, John Tapsell wrote: >> > isn't this done now?  In http://gitorious.org/favorites   it shows >> > every repo that I'm signed u

Re: [Kde-scm-interest] Have we arrived to a dead end?

2010-02-20 Thread John Tapsell
>From the MoveToGit > Gitorious Needs a feature to disable merge request emails for certain repos isn't this done now? In http://gitorious.org/favorites it shows every repo that I'm signed up to and a drop down as to whether to email commit messages or not. John __

Re: [Kde-scm-interest] Have we arrived to a dead end?

2010-02-17 Thread John Tapsell
On 17 February 2010 23:23, Oswald Buddenhagen wrote: > On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 04:50:52PM -0600, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: >> Enhancing git to support narrow clones and keeping everything in one >> repository lets individual contributors decide which part(s) of the >> tree are important to the

Re: [Kde-scm-interest] Have we arrived to a dead end?

2010-02-17 Thread John Tapsell
2010/2/17 Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. : > On Wednesday 17 February 2010 10:41:54 you wrote: >> On Wednesday 17 February 2010 15:53:55 Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: >> > In <201002171345.29844@michael-jansen.biz>, Michael Jansen wrote: >> > >You want to move the core of kde. Make a real plan. Describ

Re: [Kde-scm-interest] Have we arrived to a dead end?

2010-02-17 Thread John Tapsell
2010/2/17 Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. : > On Wednesday 17 February 2010 10:41:54 you wrote: >> On Wednesday 17 February 2010 15:53:55 Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote: >> > In <201002171345.29844@michael-jansen.biz>, Michael Jansen wrote: >> > >You want to move the core of kde. Make a real plan. Describ

Re: [Kde-scm-interest] Have we arrived to a dead end?

2010-02-17 Thread John Tapsell
2010/2/17 Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. : > In <201002171345.29844@michael-jansen.biz>, Michael Jansen wrote: >>You want to move the core of kde. Make a real plan. Describe how modules >> will be split. > > Splitting doesn't have to be done at the same time as the move to git. Is the current plan to

[Kde-scm-interest] Fw: Have we arrived to a dead end?

2010-02-12 Thread John Tapsell
- Original message - >From Riccardo Iaconelli Sent:  Fri, 12 Feb 2010, 13:35:47 EET To kde-scm-interest@kde.org Subject [Kde-scm-interest] Have we arrived to a dead end? > Hi, > so, to recap from last two immense threads (not counting KOffice one > now), seems like we're stuck between tw

Re: [Kde-scm-interest] JhBuild

2010-01-28 Thread John Tapsell
2010/1/28 Michael Pyne : > On Thursday 28 January 2010 09:51:45 John Tapsell wrote: >> Hey all, >> >> 3) It's just feels "transparent" and doesn't get in the way.  It >> doesn't hide compiler messages or anything, and it becomes normal to >

Re: [Kde-scm-interest] JhBuild

2010-01-28 Thread John Tapsell
2010/1/28 Ian Monroe : > I've moved away from the idea of blessing a build tool. Instead we > could have a officialish KDE-specific simple clone tool that did > nothing but checkout extragear/multimedia etc. Handy for people who > don't want to use a build tool and it would establish a canonical >

[Kde-scm-interest] JhBuild

2010-01-28 Thread John Tapsell
Hey all, I just joined the mailing, just to advocate using JhBuild when moving to git. This is a tool a bit like kdesvn-build that handles the dependencies between the git modules. Reason 1) Gnome and Xorg use it. Using it would mean that the three big projects would all be using the same sy