Hi @all
since sourceforge now provides SCM also in git, i would ask if someone
has anything against
moving from svn to git. I think every developer knows the advantages
of moving to git.
It would help to get develop some new features faster with branching,
fast checking/checkout,
local commi
On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 02:18:08PM +0100, Marco Gittler wrote:
> since sourceforge now provides SCM also in git, i would ask if
> someone has anything against moving from svn to git. I think
> every developer knows the advantages of moving to git.
Just in case, I can try to provide some help wit
On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 5:18 AM, Marco Gittler wrote:
> Hi @all
>
> since sourceforge now provides SCM also in git, i would ask if someone
> has anything against moving from svn to git.
Yeah, I do
> I think every developer knows the advantages of moving to git.
So I hear, but my experience tel
Hi friends,
I've been working with svk until recently. I've often been working
offline, like on the train, and wanted to check in then as well.
svk creates a local svn repository that can be synchronized with the
remote repo, it's basically a svn extension. However its development
has been discont
Hi
i keep it in sync with an script.
it will make an
git svn rebase
and push the the changes to the git repo at sf.
regards marco
Am 10.06.2010 um 14:31 schrieb Simon Eugster:
> Hi friends,
>
> I've been working with svk until recently. I've often been working
> offline, like on the train,
Hi Marco,
How does that handle git branches? or actually does it support git branches
at all?
Cheers,
Andrew
2010/6/10 Marco Gittler
> Hi
>
> i keep it in sync with an script.
> it will make an
> git svn rebase
>
> and push the the changes to the git repo at sf.
>
>
> regards marco
>
> Am 10.0
Hi
it will handle only this way: we can commit to other branches than master in
git.
this can be manual be merged into master (and the with git svn dcommit put into
svn)
so every branch except master can be used to work on.
regards marco
Am 10.06.2010 um 15:52 schrieb Andrew Manson:
> Hi Mar
Hi Marco,
Can you have a local git repo that is linked with a SVN repo and a git repo
at the same time then?
Simon
On 10.06.2010 15:47, Marco Gittler wrote:
> Hi
>
> i keep it in sync with an script.
> it will make an
> git svn rebase
>
> and push the the changes to the git repo at sf.
>
>
> re
Hi
yes, if you have the svn meta data in your git also)
with that you can then commit/checkout from svn or git, and merge/commit the
change to the other.
if i try some code, i make this in a new git branch and merge this back after
work into the git-svn/master branch so that i can commit this to
Hi,
On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 02:18:08PM +0100, Marco Gittler wrote:
> since sourceforge now provides SCM also in git, i would ask if someone
> has anything against moving from svn to git.
usually I'm just a stalker on this list, but since scm is one of my core
expertises and it looks like there
On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 11:34 PM, Clifford Wolf wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 02:18:08PM +0100, Marco Gittler wrote:
>> since sourceforge now provides SCM also in git, i would ask if someone
>> has anything against moving from svn to git.
>
> usually I'm just a stalker on this list, but
On Wednesday 04 March 2009 10:34:37 Dan Dennedy wrote:
> perhaps we should let the process
> occur naturally and be open to contributors saying "pull this change
> from my git tree at ___."
well, in that spirit, please have a look at:
git://github.com/rayl/kdenlive_copy.git review
it's mostly
On Thursday 05 March 2009 05:49:38 Ray Lehtiniemi wrote:
> well, in that spirit, please have a look at:
>
> git://github.com/rayl/kdenlive_copy.git review
> it's mostly a bunch of tweaks to address compilation warnings, a few of
> which appear to be genuine problems. i've built and started up t
On Thursday 05 March 2009 06:14:51 jb wrote:
> I had a quick look and it seems like those fixes are ok, except one [*]
> where you remove a temp variable that in fact revealed a memleak which I
> just fixed right now.
i've updated the git svn mirror with that fix, rebased the review patch queue
[resend using my list-subscribed email address]
On Thursday 05 March 2009 06:14:51 jb wrote:
> Otherwise, your patches are welcome! How should we proceed? Do you want a
> write access to our svn?
i'd prefer just throwing git branches around for review and discussion, as
i've already gone up th
Am 05.03.2009 um 21:33 schrieb Ray Lehtiniemi:
>
> [resend using my list-subscribed email address]
>
> On Thursday 05 March 2009 06:14:51 jb wrote:
>
>> Otherwise, your patches are welcome! How should we proceed? Do you
>> want a
>> write access to our svn?
>
> i'd prefer just throwing git bran
On Thursday 05 March 2009 14:09:32 Marco Gittler wrote:
> what about having an git repo on sf.net also with svn.
> we can handle/collect branches with patches, that did not find a way
> in svn yet ?
> the main development tree is in svn. and nobody need to convert from
> svn to git.
> only use ist
Am 05.03.2009 um 22:51 schrieb Ray Lehtiniemi:
> On Thursday 05 March 2009 14:09:32 Marco Gittler wrote:
>
>> what about having an git repo on sf.net also with svn.
>> we can handle/collect branches with patches, that did not find a way
>> in svn yet ?
>> the main development tree is in svn. and
On Thursday 05 March 2009 15:11:13 Marco Gittler wrote:
> PS: will we import the whole kde3/kde4 tree (the renaming/trunk moving
> would make this a bit tricky)?
well, the git svn import i did shows two completely linear branches of
development:
- trunk from 3 (20020215) to 2618 (20081102)
Am 05.03.2009 um 23:31 schrieb Ray Lehtiniemi:
> On Thursday 05 March 2009 15:11:13 Marco Gittler wrote:
>
>> PS: will we import the whole kde3/kde4 tree (the renaming/trunk
>> moving
>> would make this a bit tricky)?
>
> well, the git svn import i did shows two completely linear branches of
>
On Thursday 05 March 2009 15:39:52 Marco Gittler wrote:
> yes this is right. the tags for the releases would be also nice, but
> can be done later,
> since they are not tags but branches in svn now.
> the whole history sould be keept i think.
apparently there is a command line option i missed whi
On Thursday 05 March 2009 16:06:20 Ray Lehtiniemi wrote:
> apparently there is a command line option i missed which will do the tags
> too. i'll try again when i get home tonight and see how it works...
ok, results are in
http://github.com/rayl/kdenlive_copy2
the topology is not quite sane..
it looks ok. i made a clone of this repo on sf.net now.
so we could track now some patch-branches here.
thx and regards marco
Am 06.03.2009 um 04:08 schrieb Ray Lehtiniemi:
> On Thursday 05 March 2009 16:06:20 Ray Lehtiniemi wrote:
>> apparently there is a command line option i missed which will
On Wednesday 04 March 2009 07:34, Clifford Wolf wrote:
> btw: I'm using git a lot for projects that actually are in svn or another
> scm. in this cases I have a local git repository syncing from the projects
> central scm. there I can play around with different branches use rebase and
> all the fun
Hi,
On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 09:02:11AM +, Kevin Donnelly wrote:
> On Wednesday 04 March 2009 07:34, Clifford Wolf wrote:
> > btw: I'm using git a lot for projects that actually are in svn or another
> > scm. in this cases I have a local git repository syncing from the projects
> > central scm.
25 matches
Mail list logo
