On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 18:51, Simon Phipps wrote:
>...
>> It is not a question of benefit of the doubt. Anybody who wants to
>> make a difference is welcome to participate. The operative word,
>> however, is "participate".
>
> Help me understand here, Sam. Are you asserting that you do not cons
Sam, help me learn the system here.
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 9:45 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
>
> Whether I said it poorly or not, any statement along the lines of
> "some group needs this" without providing the resources to make it
> happen is not going to make it happen.
Greg has made clear that the
On 14.06.2011 22:45, Sam Ruby wrote:
Whether I said it poorly or not, any statement along the lines of
"some group needs this" without providing the resources to make it
happen is not going to make it happen. That statement is true no
matter what the group is, including groups that are *within*
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 4:30 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> On 14/06/2011 18:18, Simon Phipps wrote:
>
My main reason for being here is to have "a foot in both camps" and make
sure that there's someone to bring in TDF people whenever there's scope
>>> to
collaborate and draw the overall
On 14/06/2011 18:18, Simon Phipps wrote:
My main reason for being here is to have "a foot in both camps" and make
sure that there's someone to bring in TDF people whenever there's scope
to
collaborate and draw the overall OOo community together.
I'll simply note that those people with a "f
On 14/06/2011 17:33, Mathias Bauer wrote:
Starting with svn won't set anything in stone. Perhaps we should think
about our usage of svn now so that at least a later conversion to git
will be easy and without losses. We should be able to do that.
This attitude fits very well to the ASF way of d
On 14/06/2011 17:05, Simon Phipps wrote:
I'm sorry, I don't understand your point.
See my reply to Gregs mail in this thread a moment ago. I think Sam is
saying the same thing.
Ross
On 14/06/2011 16:53, Greg Stein wrote:
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 11:47, Simon Phipps wrote:
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
I know that many people also have concerns with
potential community issues. But that is all a discussion for a later
time. Not here and now.
With re
On 06/14/2011 05:22 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 11:08, Simon Phipps wrote:
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 3:59 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Christian Grobmeier
wrote:
Do you see any serious problems if the code will go into svn in the
first step (which
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 5:40 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 11:28, Mathias Bauer
> wrote:
> > - start with a git repo from the beginning
>
> As stated elsewhere, this is not available right now. There are the
> technical issues, and I know that many people also have concerns wit
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 6:22 PM, Joe Schaefer wrote:
>
> > From: Simon Phipps
> > No URL, sorry, I still haven't found the archives.
>
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-ooo-dev/
>
> (syncing happens on an hourly basis).
>
Great, thanks! (I'd been checking that URL regularl
- Original Message
> From: Simon Phipps
> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Sent: Tue, June 14, 2011 1:18:30 PM
> Subject: Re: Subversion & Git (was: Proposed short term goals)
>
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 6:09 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
>
> > On Tue,
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 6:09 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Simon Phipps wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 5:33 PM, Mathias Bauer >wrote:
> >
> >> if you talk about "community concerns", you should be more specific
> about
> >> which parts of the community are involved
On 14.06.2011 18:48, Simon Phipps wrote:
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 5:33 PM, Mathias Bauerwrote:
if you talk about "community concerns", you should be more specific about
which parts of the community are involved here.
Actually that was Sam's phrase, better ask him :-)
Sure, but it was you wh
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Simon Phipps wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 5:33 PM, Mathias Bauer wrote:
>
>> if you talk about "community concerns", you should be more specific about
>> which parts of the community are involved here.
>
> Actually that was Sam's phrase, better ask him :-)
Do
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 5:33 PM, Mathias Bauer wrote:
> if you talk about "community concerns", you should be more specific about
> which parts of the community are involved here.
>
Actually that was Sam's phrase, better ask him :-)
My main reason for being here is to have "a foot in both camps"
Hi Dennis,
On 14.06.2011 18:05, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
My impression, and it is only an impression, is that SVN is more
transparent and the web interfaces for it are valuable as part of
that. One problem with how I see git/hg being used is that work
happens substantially out of view and the
Simon,
On 14.06.2011 17:47, Simon Phipps wrote:
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
I know that many people also have concerns with
potential community issues. But that is all a discussion for a later
time. Not here and now.
With respect, that was the same phrase used to def
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 4:58 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 11:47 AM, Simon Phipps wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> >
> >> I know that many people also have concerns with
> >> potential community issues. But that is all a discussion for a later
> >>
Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2011 08:09
To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Subversion & Git (was: Proposed short term goals)
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 3:59 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Christian Grobmeier
> wrote:
> >
> > Do you see any serious
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 11:47 AM, Simon Phipps wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>
>> I know that many people also have concerns with
>> potential community issues. But that is all a discussion for a later
>> time. Not here and now.
>
> With respect, that was the same ph
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 11:47, Simon Phipps wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>
>> I know that many people also have concerns with
>> potential community issues. But that is all a discussion for a later
>> time. Not here and now.
>>
>
> With respect, that was the same ph
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
> I know that many people also have concerns with
> potential community issues. But that is all a discussion for a later
> time. Not here and now.
>
With respect, that was the same phrase used to defer discussion during the
proposal process. Lea
Below, I will refer to the information from:
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/SCM_Migration#Evaluating_the_SCM_candidates.2C_Metrics
(thanks to Meeks for pointing me there)
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 11:28, Mathias Bauer wrote:
>
> From our own experience the biggest problem with svn was
From our own experience the biggest problem with svn was merging of
branches.
We often had features that took several months of development time. We
didn't want to commit incomplete or buggy code to our master, so we
created feature branches for them and called them "child workspaces"
(cws)
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 11:24, Simon Phipps wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Andrea Pescetti
> wrote:
>
>> Simon Phipps wrote:
>> > One factor we need to consider is making it easy to collaborate with
>> > peer/downstream projects, per the podling proposal. LibreOffice has
>> > imported
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 11:22, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> Simon Phipps wrote:
>> One factor we need to consider is making it easy to collaborate with
>> peer/downstream projects, per the podling proposal. LibreOffice has
>> imported all the code into Git
>
> I'm not a LibreOffice developer, and the
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote:
> Simon Phipps wrote:
> > One factor we need to consider is making it easy to collaborate with
> > peer/downstream projects, per the podling proposal. LibreOffice has
> > imported all the code into Git
>
> I'm not a LibreOffice developer, and
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 11:08, Simon Phipps wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 3:59 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Christian Grobmeier
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Do you see any serious problems if the code will go into svn in the
>> > first step (which will last for a while)?
Simon Phipps wrote:
> One factor we need to consider is making it easy to collaborate with
> peer/downstream projects, per the podling proposal. LibreOffice has
> imported all the code into Git
I'm not a LibreOffice developer, and the code I contributed to
OpenOffice.org is outside core, but I bel
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 3:59 PM, Sam Ruby wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Christian Grobmeier
> wrote:
> >
> > Do you see any serious problems if the code will go into svn in the
> > first step (which will last for a while)?
>
> I'd like to rephrase that question: does anybody here ha
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Christian Grobmeier
wrote:
>
> Do you see any serious problems if the code will go into svn in the
> first step (which will last for a while)?
I'd like to rephrase that question: does anybody here have any
credible alternate proposal? To be credible, requires no
ASF Infra provides GIT for readonly: http://git.apache.org/
This might already help for some people.
As far as I know the GIT writing is in the makings but finished. I
heard it will take another good while to become truth.
I don't want to start a flame war - but it has been said ASF SVN can
handl
One factor we need to consider is making it easy to collaborate with
peer/downstream projects, per the podling proposal. LibreOffice has imported
all the code into Git, and I'd assume that downstream projects like
RedOffice are using either Mercurial or Git as well. While SVN is obviously
the Apach
34 matches
Mail list logo
