Guido van Rossum wrote:
> On the hosting issue, I'm still neutral -- I expect we'll be able to
> support the current developer crowd easily on svn.python.org, but if
> we ever find ther are resource problems (either people or bandwidth
> etc.) I just received a recommendation for wush.net which spe
On Aug 20, 2005, at 6:14 AM, Guido van Rossum wrote:
> I'm ready to accept te general idea of moving to subversion and away
> from SourceForge.
>
> On the hosting issue, I'm still neutral -- I expect we'll be able to
> support the current developer crowd easily on svn.python.org, but if
> we ever
I'm ready to accept te general idea of moving to subversion and away
from SourceForge.
On the hosting issue, I'm still neutral -- I expect we'll be able to
support the current developer crowd easily on svn.python.org, but if
we ever find ther are resource problems (either people or bandwidth
etc.)
Nor this Guido, FWIW (I think we shouldn't rule it out as an option,
but I don't have any preferences).
On 8/16/05, Delaney, Timothy (Tim) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tim Peters wrote:
>
> > [Martin v. Löwis]
> >> I would agree. However, there still is the debate of hosting the
> >> repository e
Tim Peters wrote:
> [Martin v. Löwis]
>> I would agree. However, there still is the debate of hosting the
>> repository elsehwere. Some people (Anthony, Guido, Tim) would prefer
>> to pay for it, instead of hosting it on svn.python.org.
>
> Not this Tim.
Not this one either. I haven't actually u
Tim Peters wrote:
> [Martin v. Löwis]
>
>> I have placed a new version of the PEP on
>>
>> http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0347.html
>>
>
> ...
>
> +1 from me. But, I don't think my vote should count much, and (sorry)
> Guido's even less: what do the people who frequently check in want?
> That me
Martin> Of course, Barry can only speak about the current availability
Martin> of volunteers, which is quite good (especially since amk took
Martin> over coordinating them)
I don't know why, but the first image that popped into my mind was of amk
beating a bunch of Hunchback of N
[Raymond Hettinger]
> +1 from me. CVS is meeting my needs but I would definitely benefit from
> fast diffs and atomic commits. My experiences with SVN to-date have all
> been positive and it was easy to learn.
Good! That was my experience too, BTW -- SVN was a genuine
improvement over CVS, and
[Martin v. Löwis]
> Ah, ok. Of course, Barry can only speak about the current availability
> of volunteers, which is quite good (especially since amk took over
> coordinating them), nobody can predict the future (the time machine
> apparently only works one-way). So I guess the concern stays, and,
Neil Schemenauer wrote:
> Another option would be to pay someone to maintain the SVN setup on
> python.org. Unfortunately, I guess that would require someone else
> to first create a detailed description of the maintenance work
> required and to process bids.
I think this would be difficult. I co
[Tim]
> +1 from me. But, I don't think my vote should count much, and (sorry)
> Guido's even less: what do the people who frequently check in want?
> That means people like you (Martin), Michael, Raymond, Walter, Fred.
> ... plus the release manager(s).
+1 from me. CVS is meeting my needs but I
Tim Peters wrote:
> Not this Tim. I _asked_ whether we had sufficient volunteer resource
> to host it on python.org, because I didn't know. Barry has since made
> sufficiently reassuring gurgles on that point, in particular that
> ongoing maintenance (after initial conversion) for filesystem-flav
[Michael Hudson]
>> I suppose another question is: when? Between 2.4.2 and 2.5a1 seems
>> like a good opportunity. I guess the biggest job is collection of
>> keys and associated admin?
[Martin v. Löwis]
> I would agree. However, there still is the debate of hosting the
> repository elsehwere. S
On Tue, 2005-08-16 at 15:18, Neil Schemenauer wrote:
> Another option would be to pay someone to maintain the SVN setup on
> python.org. Unfortunately, I guess that would require someone else
> to first create a detailed description of the maintenance work
> required and to process bids.
Again,
On Tue, Aug 16, 2005 at 08:31:20PM +0200, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
> I would agree. However, there still is the debate of hosting the
> repository elsehwere. Some people (Anthony, Guido, Tim) would prefer
> to pay for it, instead of hosting it on svn.python.org.
Another option would be to pay some
Michael Hudson wrote:
> I suppose another question is: when? Between 2.4.2 and 2.5a1 seems
> like a good opportunity. I guess the biggest job is collection of
> keys and associated admin?
I would agree. However, there still is the debate of hosting the
repository elsehwere. Some people (Anthony,
James Y Knight wrote:
> cvs2svn does that by default (now).
Ah, ok.
Martin
___
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mai
On Aug 16, 2005, at 2:52 AM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
> Tim Peters wrote:
>
>> It would be best if svn:eol-style were set to native during initial
>> conversion from CVS, on all files not marked binary in CVS.
>>
>
> Ok, I'll add that to the PEP. Not sure how to implement it, yet...
cvs2svn does tha
On Tue, Aug 16, 2005 at 10:08:26PM +1000, Anthony Baxter wrote:
> On Tuesday 16 August 2005 21:42, Michael Hudson wrote:
> > I want svn, I think. I'm open to more sophisticated approaches but am
> > not sure that any of them are really mature enough yet. Probably will
> > be soon, but not soon en
Barry Warsaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, 2005-08-16 at 07:42, Michael Hudson wrote:
>
>> The third set of people who count are pydotorg admins. I'm not really
>> one of those either at the moment. While SF's CVS setup has it's
>> problems (occasional outages; it's only CVS) it's hard t
On Tue, 2005-08-16 at 07:42, Michael Hudson wrote:
> The third set of people who count are pydotorg admins. I'm not really
> one of those either at the moment. While SF's CVS setup has it's
> problems (occasional outages; it's only CVS) it's hard to beat what it
> costs us in sysadmin time: zero
On Tuesday 16 August 2005 21:42, Michael Hudson wrote:
> I want svn, I think. I'm open to more sophisticated approaches but am
> not sure that any of them are really mature enough yet. Probably will
> be soon, but not soon enough to void the effort of moving to svn
> (IMHO).
>
> I'm not really a
Tim Peters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> [Martin v. Löwis]
>> I have placed a new version of the PEP on
>>
>> http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0347.html
>
> ...
>
> +1 from me. But, I don't think my vote should count much, and (sorry)
> Guido's even less: what do the people who frequently check i
Tim Peters wrote:
> It would be best if svn:eol-style were set to native during initial
> conversion from CVS, on all files not marked binary in CVS.
Ok, I'll add that to the PEP. Not sure how to implement it, yet...
Regards,
Martin
___
Python-Dev maili
[Martin v. Löwis]
> I have placed a new version of the PEP on
>
> http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0347.html
...
+1 from me. But, I don't think my vote should count much, and (sorry)
Guido's even less: what do the people who frequently check in want?
That means people like you (Martin), Michael
On 8/7/05, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Brett Cannon wrote:
> > What is going in under python/ ? If it is what is currently
> > /dist/src/, then great and the renaming of the repository works.
>
> Just have a look yourself :-) Yes, this is dist/src.
>
Ah, OK. I didn't drill f
Brett Cannon wrote:
> What is going in under python/ ? If it is what is currently
> /dist/src/, then great and the renaming of the repository works.
Just have a look yourself :-) Yes, this is dist/src.
> But if that is what src/ is going to be used for
This is nondist/src. Perhaps I should just
On 8/7/05, "Martin v. Löwis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have placed a new version of the PEP on
>
> http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0347.html
>
> Changes to the previous version include:
>
> - add more rationale for using svn (atomic changesets,
> fast tags and branches)
>
> - changed conv
I have placed a new version of the PEP on
http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0347.html
Changes to the previous version include:
- add more rationale for using svn (atomic changesets,
fast tags and branches)
- changed conversion procedure to a single repository, with
some reorganization. See
29 matches
Mail list logo
