On Sat, Aug 01, 2015 at 03:27:23PM +1000, Jonathan Liu wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2/06/2015 8:27 PM, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
> >On 1 June 2015 at 19:12, David Herrmann wrote:
> >>Hi
> >>
> >>As of today we've disabled git-push to fd.o. The official development
> >>git repository is now at github [1].
Hi,
On 2/06/2015 8:27 PM, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
On 1 June 2015 at 19:12, David Herrmann wrote:
Hi
As of today we've disabled git-push to fd.o. The official development
git repository is now at github [1]. The old repository will still be
back-synced, but we had to disable push-access to
On Sat, 18.07.15 19:06, Marc Haber (mh+systemd-de...@zugschlus.de) wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 01:02:43PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> > On Mon, 01.06.15 22:43, Michael Biebl (mbi...@gmail.com) wrote:
> >
> > > 2015-06-01 20:12 GMT+02:00 David Herrmann :
> > > > Hi
> > > >
> > > > As o
On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 01:02:43PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Mon, 01.06.15 22:43, Michael Biebl (mbi...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
> > 2015-06-01 20:12 GMT+02:00 David Herrmann :
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > As of today we've disabled git-push to fd.o. The official development
> > > git repository is
On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 5:30 AM, Filipe Brandenburger
wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 12:31 PM, Ronny Chevalier
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 6:31 PM, Filipe Brandenburger
>> wrote:
>>> Another downside of adding comments to the commits is that e-mail
>>> notifications are not sent for t
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 12:31 PM, Ronny Chevalier
wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 6:31 PM, Filipe Brandenburger
> wrote:
>> Another downside of adding comments to the commits is that e-mail
>> notifications are not sent for them (I just noticed that while lurking
>> on #164, I got e-mails for t
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 6:31 PM, Filipe Brandenburger
wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Lennart Poettering
> wrote:
>> On Wed, 10.06.15 08:25, Filipe Brandenburger (filbran...@google.com) wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 6:31 AM, Alban Crequy wrote:
>>> > FWIW it only loses the comment
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 9:52 AM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> On Wed, 10.06.15 08:25, Filipe Brandenburger (filbran...@google.com) wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 6:31 AM, Alban Crequy wrote:
>> > FWIW it only loses the comments if people comment on individual
>> > commits instead of commenting
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 7:01 PM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> Well, but it's really weird... If you start out with a patch things
> are tracked as PR. If you start out without a patch things are tracked
> as an issue. And they have quite different workflows, as PRs cannot be
> reopened and issues ca
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 02:01:06AM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>
>
> On 06/10/2015 07:36 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> >On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 07:04:17PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> >>On 06/10/2015 05:46 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> >>>There's also no real need for it, I don't understand wh
On 06/10/2015 07:36 PM, Greg KH wrote:
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 07:04:17PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
On 06/10/2015 05:46 PM, Greg KH wrote:
There's also no real need for it, I don't understand why you keep
insisting there is given how well things have been working so far.
I do und
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 07:04:17PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 06/10/2015 05:46 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> >There's also no real need for it, I don't understand why you keep
> >insisting there is given how well things have been working so far.
>
> I do understand and am aware of the compl
On 06/10/2015 05:46 PM, Greg KH wrote:
There's also no real need for it, I don't understand why you keep
insisting there is given how well things have been working so far.
I do understand and am aware of the complication ( legal and otherwise
social aspect of it etc ) involved with bringing fu
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 05:38:30PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>
>
> On 06/10/2015 04:35 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> >On Wed, 10.06.15 16:20, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson (johan...@gmail.com) wrote:
> >
> >>>Without proper infrastructure ( or at least the wills to acquire such )
> >>>how
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 05:38:30PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>
>
> On 06/10/2015 04:35 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> >On Wed, 10.06.15 16:20, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson (johan...@gmail.com) wrote:
> >
> >>>Without proper infrastructure ( or at least the wills to acquire such )
> >>>how
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 05:38:30PM +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>
>
> On 06/10/2015 04:35 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> >On Wed, 10.06.15 16:20, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson (johan...@gmail.com) wrote:
> >
> >>>Without proper infrastructure ( or at least the wills to acquire such )
> >>>how
On Wed, 10.06.15 17:38, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson (johan...@gmail.com) wrote:
> >>>Without proper infrastructure ( or at least the wills to acquire such )
> >>>how
> >>>can you ( or any of us for that matter ) with a straight face advocate for
> >>>consolidation and call systemd the modern building
On 06/10/2015 04:35 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Wed, 10.06.15 16:20, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson (johan...@gmail.com) wrote:
>Without proper infrastructure ( or at least the wills to acquire such ) how
>can you ( or any of us for that matter ) with a straight face advocate for
>consolidation
B1;4002;0cOn Wed, 10.06.15 08:25, Filipe Brandenburger (filbran...@google.com)
wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 6:31 AM, Alban Crequy wrote:
> >>> Instead, just reuse the same PR and use `git push -f` to ship new
> >>> versions of the commits to the same branch... Yes it's awful but
> >>> unfort
On Wed, 10.06.15 15:31, Alban Crequy (al...@endocode.com) wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 11:37 PM, Lennart Poettering
> wrote:
> > On Tue, 09.06.15 13:04, Filipe Brandenburger (filbran...@google.com) wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 12:59 PM, Lennart Poettering
> >> wrote:
> >> > [...] so
On Wed, 10.06.15 16:20, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson (johan...@gmail.com) wrote:
> Without proper infrastructure ( or at least the wills to acquire such ) how
> can you ( or any of us for that matter ) with a straight face advocate for
> consolidation and call systemd the modern building block of an OS
On 06/10/2015 03:09 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Wed, 10.06.15 14:53, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson (johan...@gmail.com) wrote:
WHat really surprises me about the whole discussion is that we cannot
be the first ones running into this. Given the success of github this
must be a common issue. And i
On 06/10/2015 05:53 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
On 06/10/2015 12:35 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Wed, 10.06.15 14:04, Martin Jansa (martin.ja...@gmail.com) wrote:
WHat really surprises me about the whole discussion is that we cannot
be the first ones running into this. Given the
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 5:04 AM, Martin Jansa wrote:
> If you want good review tool, why not use gerrit?
+1 for Gerrit as a code review tool.
It's not perfect, but from all of them that I've used it seems to get
the most right:
- Review *commits* and not PRs (tends to drives up the quality of
in
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 6:31 AM, Alban Crequy wrote:
>>> Instead, just reuse the same PR and use `git push -f` to ship new
>>> versions of the commits to the same branch... Yes it's awful but
>>> unfortunately that's how GitHub works...
>>
>> Yeah, it is awful, and loses all the comments, as well
On Wed, 10.06.15 14:53, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson (johan...@gmail.com) wrote:
> >>>WHat really surprises me about the whole discussion is that we cannot
> >>>be the first ones running into this. Given the success of github this
> >>>must be a common issue. And if it is, then either github is actually
On 06/10/2015 12:35 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Wed, 10.06.15 14:04, Martin Jansa (martin.ja...@gmail.com) wrote:
WHat really surprises me about the whole discussion is that we cannot
be the first ones running into this. Given the success of github this
must be a common issue. And if it
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 11:37 PM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> On Tue, 09.06.15 13:04, Filipe Brandenburger (filbran...@google.com) wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 12:59 PM, Lennart Poettering
>> wrote:
>> > [...] so we comment and ask for a new PR, and close the old one.
>>
>> See my previous c
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 3:35 PM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> On Wed, 10.06.15 14:04, Martin Jansa (martin.ja...@gmail.com) wrote:
>
>> > WHat really surprises me about the whole discussion is that we cannot
>> > be the first ones running into this. Given the success of github this
>> > must be a c
On Wed, 10.06.15 14:04, Martin Jansa (martin.ja...@gmail.com) wrote:
> > WHat really surprises me about the whole discussion is that we cannot
> > be the first ones running into this. Given the success of github this
> > must be a common issue. And if it is, then either github is actually
> > pret
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 12:01:18AM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Tue, 09.06.15 14:54, Filipe Brandenburger (filbran...@google.com) wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Lennart Poettering
> > wrote:
> > > On Tue, 09.06.15 13:04, Filipe Brandenburger (filbran...@google.com)
> > > w
On Wed, 10.06.15 06:44, Martin Pitt (martin.p...@ubuntu.com) wrote:
> Filipe Brandenburger [2015-06-09 12:55 -0700]:
> > I think a more productive advice would be for reviewers to avoid using
> > line comments for anything that is wanted for posterity and instead
> > only use them to say "typo" or
On 06/09/2015 10:50 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
I would like to see us move and migrated the bugs to jira ( which is without
>doubt the best and friendliest bug tracker I have found ) which integrates
>nicely with github as well as move the community wiki to confluence to
>strengthen collaborat
Filipe Brandenburger [2015-06-09 12:55 -0700]:
> I think a more productive advice would be for reviewers to avoid using
> line comments for anything that is wanted for posterity and instead
> only use them to say "typo" or "comment here" or to point out what
> exactly in the code the comment on the
On 06/09/2015 09:44 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Tue, 09.06.15 21:11, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson (johan...@gmail.com) wrote:
We need to do proper QA to properly support and backup our downstream
consumers ( distributions, embedded and otherwise) and that means tagging
bugs by distributions, v
On 06/09/2015 09:34 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Tue, 09.06.15 19:19, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson (johan...@gmail.com) wrote:
On 06/09/2015 06:42 PM, David Timothy Strauss wrote:
Let's just try the GitHub tracker. I like how it associates issues with
pull requests and supports auto-linking for
On Tue, 09.06.15 14:54, Filipe Brandenburger (filbran...@google.com) wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Lennart Poettering
> wrote:
> > On Tue, 09.06.15 13:04, Filipe Brandenburger (filbran...@google.com) wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 12:59 PM, Lennart Poettering
> >> wrote:
> >> > [
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> On Tue, 09.06.15 13:04, Filipe Brandenburger (filbran...@google.com) wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 12:59 PM, Lennart Poettering
>> wrote:
>> > [...] so we comment and ask for a new PR, and close the old one.
>>
>> See my previous com
On Tue, 09.06.15 21:11, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson (johan...@gmail.com) wrote:
> We need to do proper QA to properly support and backup our downstream
> consumers ( distributions, embedded and otherwise) and that means tagging
> bugs by distributions, vendors, releases.
I'd be very careful with start
On Tue, 09.06.15 12:55, Filipe Brandenburger (filbran...@google.com) wrote:
> Moving from #88 to this thread:
>
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 12:41 PM, Lennart Poettering
> wrote:
> > So I think updating the PR (by force-pushing) is really nasty, and we
> > shouldn't do it. Instead, please push a new
On Tue, 09.06.15 13:04, Filipe Brandenburger (filbran...@google.com) wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 12:59 PM, Lennart Poettering
> wrote:
> > [...] so we comment and ask for a new PR, and close the old one.
>
> See my previous comment, I think this "cure" is worse than the
> "disease" :-)
Why
On Tue, 09.06.15 19:19, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson (johan...@gmail.com) wrote:
> On 06/09/2015 06:42 PM, David Timothy Strauss wrote:
> >Let's just try the GitHub tracker. I like how it associates issues with
> >pull requests and supports auto-linking for commit IDs, user names, and
> >other issue numb
On 06/09/2015 07:50 PM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Tue, 09.06.15 11:30, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson (johan...@gmail.com) wrote:
I would like to see us move and migrated the bugs to jira ( which is without
doubt the best and friendliest bug tracker I have found ) which integrates
nicely with githu
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 12:59 PM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> [...] so we comment and ask for a new PR, and close the old one.
See my previous comment, I think this "cure" is worse than the "disease" :-)
Instead, just reuse the same PR and use `git push -f` to ship new
versions of the commits to
Usually, when a PR needs fixing, it is done in the same PR, and there may
be need to rebase so that commit history is not polluted, hence git push -f
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 3:59 PM Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> On Tue, 09.06.15 18:42, David Timothy Strauss (da...@davidstrauss.net)
> wrote:
>
> > Le
On Tue, 09.06.15 18:42, David Timothy Strauss (da...@davidstrauss.net) wrote:
> Let's just try the GitHub tracker. I like how it associates issues with
> pull requests and supports auto-linking for commit IDs, user names, and
> other issue numbers. Is there any serious use case for systemd upstrea
Moving from #88 to this thread:
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 12:41 PM, Lennart Poettering
wrote:
> So I think updating the PR (by force-pushing) is really nasty, and we
> shouldn't do it. Instead, please push a new PR, mention that it
> obsoletes the old one. (of course, I wished that github would know
On Tue, 09.06.15 11:30, Jóhann B. Guðmundsson (johan...@gmail.com) wrote:
> I would like to see us move and migrated the bugs to jira ( which is without
> doubt the best and friendliest bug tracker I have found ) which integrates
> nicely with github as well as move the community wiki to confluenc
On Wed, 03.06.15 10:39, Krzesimir Nowak (krzesi...@endocode.com) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I see that some patches from mailing list were imported as issues to
> github.com (like this one - https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/16).
> There's a problem with that - I can't update the PR anymore with foll
On 06/09/2015 06:42 PM, David Timothy Strauss wrote:
Let's just try the GitHub tracker. I like how it associates issues
with pull requests and supports auto-linking for commit IDs, user
names, and other issue numbers. Is there any serious use case for
systemd upstream it doesn't support?
I ca
On 06/09/2015 06:53 PM, Camilo Aguilar wrote:
Oh please Jira no, it is too much and the user friendliness is highly
arguable.
Please do not top post and compared to bugzilla and the lack of proper
oversight github and other issue tracker provide it's much better.
JBG
_
On 06/09/2015 06:42 PM, David Timothy Strauss wrote:
Let's just try the GitHub tracker. I like how it associates issues
with pull requests and supports auto-linking for commit IDs, user
names, and other issue numbers. Is there any serious use case for
systemd upstream it doesn't support?
What
Oh please Jira no, it is too much and the user friendliness is highly
arguable.
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 8:46 AM "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"
wrote:
>
>
> On 06/09/2015 11:57 AM, Mihamina Rakotomandimby wrote:
> > On 06/09/2015 02:30 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> >>
> >
> > As of today we
Let's just try the GitHub tracker. I like how it associates issues with
pull requests and supports auto-linking for commit IDs, user names, and
other issue numbers. Is there any serious use case for systemd upstream it
doesn't support?
___
systemd-devel m
On 06/09/2015 11:57 AM, Mihamina Rakotomandimby wrote:
On 06/09/2015 02:30 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
As of today we've disabled git-push to fd.o. The official development
git repository is now at github [1].
What about the bug tracker? Will it remain at fdo's bugzilla. I have
to a
On 06/09/2015 02:30 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
As of today we've disabled git-push to fd.o. The official development
git repository is now at github [1].
What about the bug tracker? Will it remain at fdo's bugzilla. I have
to admit I'm not a huge fan of github's bug tracker.
I am not
On 06/09/2015 11:02 AM, Lennart Poettering wrote:
On Mon, 01.06.15 22:43, Michael Biebl (mbi...@gmail.com) wrote:
2015-06-01 20:12 GMT+02:00 David Herrmann :
Hi
As of today we've disabled git-push to fd.o. The official development
git repository is now at github [1].
What about the bug tra
On Mon, 01.06.15 22:43, Michael Biebl (mbi...@gmail.com) wrote:
> 2015-06-01 20:12 GMT+02:00 David Herrmann :
> > Hi
> >
> > As of today we've disabled git-push to fd.o. The official development
> > git repository is now at github [1].
>
> What about the bug tracker? Will it remain at fdo's bugzi
On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 7:02 AM, David Herrmann wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 7:48 PM, Lucas De Marchi
> wrote:
>> Of course this is a non-issue for several projects in github which
>> don't have proper commit
>> review. It's not the case of systemd and it seems it's even the reason
>> wh
Hi
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 7:48 PM, Lucas De Marchi
wrote:
> Of course this is a non-issue for several projects in github which
> don't have proper commit
> review. It's not the case of systemd and it seems it's even the reason
> why you are moving
> to github. So I'm just curious if anything cha
On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 11:53 AM, Kay Sievers wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 4:34 PM, Martin Pitt wrote:
>> David Herrmann [2015-06-02 13:06 +0200]:
>>> Our preferred way to send future patches is "the github way". This
>>> means sending pull-requests to the github repo. Furthermore, all
>>> feat
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 7:06 PM, David Timothy Strauss
wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 5:03 PM Kay Sievers wrote:
>>
>> Could you please check your old repos at:
>> https://github.com/systemd
>> and move or delete them if they are no longer needed. One of them at
>> least has a comment like "Thi
On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 5:03 PM Kay Sievers wrote:
> Could you please check your old repos at:
> https://github.com/systemd
> and move or delete them if they are no longer needed. One of them at
> least has a comment like "This is old. Actual repo is on my
> davidstrauss account. Will clean up s
On 6/3/15, 7:14 AM, "Filipe Brandenburger" wrote:
>
>I think, though, in general, the "GitHub way" of focusing on PRs and
>not commits tends to generate poorer git commits and git histories in
>general. I too often see broken PRs being ammended with second or
>third commits to fix the bugs, whi
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 7:58 AM, Dimitri John Ledkov
wrote:
> And I think this is _good_, because the submitter's commit ids will be
> preserved (together with the signed gpg commits) [...]
This, signed gpg commits, is actually the first reasonable argument I
see for merging and not rebasing
Abdó Roig-Maranges wrote on 02/06/15 17:03:
>
> Daniel Mack writes:
>
>> On 06/02/2015 04:34 PM, Martin Pitt wrote:
>>> Merging manually is quite a bit of work, as you have to add a new
>>> remote every time, fetch that, and pull from it. But it does keep a
>>> cleaner git log history.
>>
>> Btw,
Hello Krzesimir,
Krzesimir Nowak [2015-06-03 10:39 +0200]:
> I see that some patches from mailing list were imported as issues to
> github.com (like this one - https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/16).
> There's a problem with that - I can't update the PR anymore with followup
> fixes and whatn
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 8:12 PM, David Herrmann
wrote:
> Hi
>
> As of today we've disabled git-push to fd.o. The official development
> git repository is now at github [1]. The old repository will still be
> back-synced, but we had to disable push-access to avoid getting
> out-of-sync with github.
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 1:51 AM, David Timothy Strauss
wrote:
> Looks like everything's in place now at the new github.com/systemd/systemd
> home.
>
> I've halted the Jenkins CI from pushing to that repository (which was
> formerly the mirror updated whenever CI passed). I'll probably update CI to
Looks like everything's in place now at the new github.com/systemd/systemd
home.
I've halted the Jenkins CI from pushing to that repository (which was
formerly the mirror updated whenever CI passed). I'll probably update CI to
merely push a branch like "master-passing" so there's still a way to ge
On 6/2/15, 2:05 PM, "Stefan Tatschner" wrote:
>On Tue, 2015-06-02 at 14:49 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
>> > Merging manually is quite a bit of work, as you have to add a new
>> > remote every time, fetch that, and pull from it. But it does keep a
>> > cleaner git log history.
>> I'd
On Tue, 2015-06-02 at 14:49 +, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > Merging manually is quite a bit of work, as you have to add a new
> > remote every time, fetch that, and pull from it. But it does keep a
> > cleaner git log history.
> I'd very much prefer to keep current look of the git tre
On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 6:31 AM, Daniel Mack wrote:
> On 06/02/2015 02:19 PM, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 1:06 PM, David Herrmann wrote:
>>> Regarding the final github address: David Strauss kindly offered the
>>> 'systemd' user to us. Hence, we hope to move the repository
On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 1:06 PM, David Herrmann wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 8:12 PM, David Herrmann wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> As of today we've disabled git-push to fd.o. The official development
>> git repository is now at github [1]. The old repository will still be
>> back-synced, but we ha
Dimitri John Ledkov [2015-06-02 15:58 +0100]:
> And I think this is _good_, because the submitter's commit ids will be
> preserved (together with the signed gpg commits) and the maintainers
> are discouraged to "fix-up" and/or "adjust" commits upon rebase /
> git-am. Instead fix-ups from reviewer s
Daniel Mack writes:
> On 06/02/2015 04:34 PM, Martin Pitt wrote:
>> Merging manually is quite a bit of work, as you have to add a new
>> remote every time, fetch that, and pull from it. But it does keep a
>> cleaner git log history.
>
> Btw, Harald pointed me to this simple alias that makes check
On 06/02/2015 04:34 PM, Martin Pitt wrote:
> Merging manually is quite a bit of work, as you have to add a new
> remote every time, fetch that, and pull from it. But it does keep a
> cleaner git log history.
Btw, Harald pointed me to this simple alias that makes checking out a
pending pull request
On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 03:58:33PM +0100, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
> On 2 June 2015 at 15:49, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 04:34:03PM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
> >> David Herrmann [2015-06-02 13:06 +0200]:
> >> > Our preferred way to send future patches is "t
On 2 June 2015 at 15:56, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 04:34:03PM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
>> David Herrmann [2015-06-02 13:06 +0200]:
>> > Our preferred way to send future patches is "the github way". This
>> > means sending pull-requests to the github repo. Furthermore, al
On 2 June 2015 at 15:49, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 04:34:03PM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
>> David Herrmann [2015-06-02 13:06 +0200]:
>> > Our preferred way to send future patches is "the github way". This
>> > means sending pull-requests to the github repo. Furthe
On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 04:34:03PM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
> David Herrmann [2015-06-02 13:06 +0200]:
> > Our preferred way to send future patches is "the github way". This
> > means sending pull-requests to the github repo. Furthermore, all
> > feature patches should go through pull-requests and
On 2 June 2015 at 15:34, Martin Pitt wrote:
> David Herrmann [2015-06-02 13:06 +0200]:
>> Our preferred way to send future patches is "the github way". This
>> means sending pull-requests to the github repo. Furthermore, all
>> feature patches should go through pull-requests and should get
>> revi
On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 4:34 PM, Martin Pitt wrote:
> David Herrmann [2015-06-02 13:06 +0200]:
>> Our preferred way to send future patches is "the github way". This
>> means sending pull-requests to the github repo. Furthermore, all
>> feature patches should go through pull-requests and should get
On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 04:34:03PM +0200, Martin Pitt wrote:
> David Herrmann [2015-06-02 13:06 +0200]:
> > Our preferred way to send future patches is "the github way". This
> > means sending pull-requests to the github repo. Furthermore, all
> > feature patches should go through pull-requests and
David Herrmann [2015-06-02 13:06 +0200]:
> Our preferred way to send future patches is "the github way". This
> means sending pull-requests to the github repo. Furthermore, all
> feature patches should go through pull-requests and should get
> reviewed pre-commit. This applies to everyone. Exceptio
On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 04:03:59PM +0200, David Herrmann wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 03:31:19PM +0200, Daniel Mack wrote:
> >> On 06/02/2015 02:19 PM, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 1:06
Hi
On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 03:31:19PM +0200, Daniel Mack wrote:
>> On 06/02/2015 02:19 PM, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
>> > On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 1:06 PM, David Herrmann
>> > wrote:
>> >> Regarding the final github address: Dav
On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 03:31:19PM +0200, Daniel Mack wrote:
> On 06/02/2015 02:19 PM, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 1:06 PM, David Herrmann
> > wrote:
> >> Regarding the final github address: David Strauss kindly offered the
> >> 'systemd' user to us. Hence, we hope to mov
On 06/02/2015 02:19 PM, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 1:06 PM, David Herrmann wrote:
>> Regarding the final github address: David Strauss kindly offered the
>> 'systemd' user to us. Hence, we hope to move the repository to
>> github.com/systemd/systemd this week. Sorry for the
On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 1:06 PM, David Herrmann wrote:
> Regarding the final github address: David Strauss kindly offered the
> 'systemd' user to us. Hence, we hope to move the repository to
> github.com/systemd/systemd this week. Sorry for the confusion, I hope
> we can settle all this this week.
On 06/02/2015 11:48 AM, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
On 2 June 2015 at 12:34, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
On 06/02/2015 11:06 AM, David Herrmann wrote:
Regarding the final github address: David Strauss kindly offered the
'systemd' user to us. Hence, we hope to move the repository to
github
On 2 June 2015 at 12:34, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>
>
> On 06/02/2015 11:06 AM, David Herrmann wrote:
>>
>> Regarding the final github address: David Strauss kindly offered the
>> 'systemd' user to us. Hence, we hope to move the repository to
>> github.com/systemd/systemd this week. Sorry fo
On 06/02/2015 11:06 AM, David Herrmann wrote:
Regarding the final github address: David Strauss kindly offered the
'systemd' user to us. Hence, we hope to move the repository to
github.com/systemd/systemd this week. Sorry for the confusion, I hope
we can settle all this this week.
Given that
Hi
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 8:12 PM, David Herrmann wrote:
> Hi
>
> As of today we've disabled git-push to fd.o. The official development
> git repository is now at github [1]. The old repository will still be
> back-synced, but we had to disable push-access to avoid getting
> out-of-sync with gith
On 1 June 2015 at 19:12, David Herrmann wrote:
> Hi
>
> As of today we've disabled git-push to fd.o. The official development
> git repository is now at github [1]. The old repository will still be
> back-synced, but we had to disable push-access to avoid getting
> out-of-sync with github.
>
> [1]
Hi
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 9:17 PM, David Timothy Strauss
wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 11:20 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 08:12:37PM +0200, David Herrmann wrote:
>> > [1] https://github.com/systemd-devs/systemd
>> Is there a particular reason not to use
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 8:12 PM, David Herrmann wrote:
> Hi
>
> As of today we've disabled git-push to fd.o. The official development
> git repository is now at github [1]. The old repository will still be
> back-synced, but we had to disable push-access to avoid getting
> out-of-sync with github.
Hey David,
David Herrmann [2015-06-01 20:12 +0200]:
> As of today we've disabled git-push to fd.o. The official development
> git repository is now at github [1].
Can you copy the committer list from fd.o? Right now it seems the only
person that can actually push to systemd-devs/systemd is you
(h
2015-06-01 20:12 GMT+02:00 David Herrmann :
> Hi
>
> As of today we've disabled git-push to fd.o. The official development
> git repository is now at github [1].
What about the bug tracker? Will it remain at fdo's bugzilla. I have
to admit I'm not a huge fan of github's bug tracker.
Michael
--
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 11:20 AM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <
zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 08:12:37PM +0200, David Herrmann wrote:
> > [1] https://github.com/systemd-devs/systemd
> Is there a particular reason not to use the existing
> https://github.com/systemd/systemd ?
>
1 - 100 of 103 matches
Mail list logo
