Some other new features I've noticed that haven't been listed:
* Showing who has the ability to vote in each category (easily identify
project owners).
* Switch patchsets while in diff view.
* Changes show if they need to be rebased.
*--*
*Tyler Romeo*
Stevens Institute of Technology, Class of 201
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 4:18 PM, Merlijn van Deen wrote:
> Hi Chad,
>
> On 12 February 2013 03:33, Chad wrote:
>> Took a few minutes longer than expected, but we're back up and
>> everything's live. We had to deploy a newer version to grab one
>> last fix we spotted during the upgrade. Our deploy
Hi Chad,
On 12 February 2013 03:33, Chad wrote:
> Took a few minutes longer than expected, but we're back up and
> everything's live. We had to deploy a newer version to grab one
> last fix we spotted during the upgrade. Our deployed version is
> now 2.5.1-1266-gcc231e1.
Thanks for performing th
Yep. Logged in as mwal...@wikimedia.org. It's odd because I still have +2
on the fundraising repos. Maybe the ACL computation changed and I'm not in
some group that I should have been in?
~Matt Walker
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Bartosz Dziewoński wrote:
> Are you logged in? Everyone got
Are you logged in? Everyone got logged out apparently, and this bit me at
first, too.
--
Matma Rex
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Matthew Walker wrote:
> I am liking the new UI features. However -- I notice that I seem to have
> lost +2 rights to mediawiki/core. Are we rolling back the policy that all
> foundation developers have +2?
>
No, this should not have changed...
-Chad
I am liking the new UI features. However -- I notice that I seem to have
lost +2 rights to mediawiki/core. Are we rolling back the policy that all
foundation developers have +2?
~Matt Walker
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Chad wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 6:49 PM, Chad wrote:
> > On Fri,
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 11:57 PM, Matthew Flaschen
wrote:
> On 02/11/2013 09:33 PM, Chad wrote:
>> There might be a few problems left over with the IRC notifications,
>> I'll tackle those tomorrow (making sure replication is working properly
>> now). If you spot any other problems, please let me k
On 02/11/2013 09:33 PM, Chad wrote:
> There might be a few problems left over with the IRC notifications,
> I'll tackle those tomorrow (making sure replication is working properly
> now). If you spot any other problems, please let me know.
I'm getting Internal Server Error intermittently in the ad
On Monday, February 11, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Chad wrote:
> Took a few minutes longer than expected, but we're back up and
> everything's live. We had to deploy a newer version to grab one
> last fix we spotted during the upgrade. Our deployed version is
> now 2.5.1-1266-gcc231e1.
>
> There might be
On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 6:49 PM, Chad wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 8:52 AM, Chad wrote:
>> Rest assured--we will still be getting the latest and greatest. And we're
>> still
>> on target for late Monday/early Tuesday.
>>
>
> Friendly reminder that Gerrit will be coming down in about an hour
>
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 8:52 AM, Chad wrote:
> Rest assured--we will still be getting the latest and greatest. And we're
> still
> on target for late Monday/early Tuesday.
>
Friendly reminder that Gerrit will be coming down in about an hour
for the upgrade. During the upgrade, you may be able to
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 6:44 AM, Chad wrote:
> Hi,
>
> After much delay, Gerrit 2.6 will be coming to our servers. This release
> brings a *lot* of really cool features and fixes, but I'd like to outline a
> couple of the major ones:
>
I realized a little bit ago that I was a bit ambitious in call
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 6:44 AM, Chad wrote:
> Hi,
>
> After much delay, Gerrit 2.6 will be coming to our servers. This release
> brings a *lot* of really cool features and fixes, but I'd like to outline a
> couple of the major ones:
>
> * A stable, documented RESTful api
> * Plugin support:
> ** W
>
> If we can come up with some sane rewrite rules, I think we could
> redirect gitweb urls to gitblit.
+1 -- like Mark I've used gitweb URLs in several places that I wouldn't
like to see breaking (one of them is original source of images moved to
commons from git).
~Walker
_
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 10:21 AM, Sébastien Santoro
wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Chad wrote:
>>> Does this mean new links will be in place? I've used links like
>>> https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/gitweb?p=mediawiki%2Fcore.git;a=commit;h=f04103185a071fc7ceb7f25daf1467791f2ae391
>>> and
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Chad wrote:
>> Does this mean new links will be in place? I've used links like
>> https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/gitweb?p=mediawiki%2Fcore.git;a=commit;h=f04103185a071fc7ceb7f25daf1467791f2ae391
>> and it would be nice if those didn't break.
>>
>
> Yes, the urls w
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 9:19 AM, Mark A. Hershberger wrote:
> On 02/04/2013 06:44 AM, Chad wrote:
>> ** We'll be replacing Gitweb with Gitblit once the initial dust of the
>> upgrade settles
>
> Does this mean new links will be in place? I've used links like
> https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/gitweb
On 02/04/2013 06:44 AM, Chad wrote:
> ** We'll be replacing Gitweb with Gitblit once the initial dust of the
> upgrade settles
Does this mean new links will be in place? I've used links like
https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/gitweb?p=mediawiki%2Fcore.git;a=commit;h=f04103185a071fc7ceb7f25daf1467791f
19 matches
Mail list logo
