It's nothing personal, Erik! I honestly wouldn't want people to put additional effort just for the sake of saying "we've switched to git". But at the same time what's driving me is what I mentioned at the beginning -- I was reluctant to switch to git (with my other projects) at first too, but I see many benefits of working with it now that outweigh the cons of spending extra time to learning new things.
Anyway, I hope you'll find it enjoyable, not annoying, to work with this tool. Dawid On Sat, Jan 23, 2016 at 3:16 AM, Erick Erickson <[email protected]> wrote: > Dawid: > > Ignore me. Mostly raising the issue to make sure it was considered. > I'm not about to argue with the "heavies" on this issue... > > Full Speed Ahead! > > On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 4:57 AM, Dawid Weiss <[email protected]> wrote: >> Thanks Uwe, much appreciated. >> >> Dawid >> >> On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 1:55 PM, Uwe Schindler <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I am on a trip in Amsterdam, returning this evening. I will take care of >>> Jenkins! Will update Policeman's JDKs, too, and install all necessary Git >>> tools on Slave VMs. >>> >>> Uwe >>> >>> Am 22. Januar 2016 13:21:40 MEZ, schrieb Dawid Weiss >>> <[email protected]>: >>>> >>>> So, we do the switch, right? Seeing the discussions and conflicting >>>> arguments/ preferences I'm no longer that enthusiastic about the whole >>>> ordeal... it feels like we're trying to disturb people in their work. >>>> Sigh. Anyway, if this experiment doesn't work we *can* revert. It's >>>> not the end of the world. >>>> >>>> I would like everyone to help a bit by: >>>> >>>> 1) disabling their CI builds (Jenkins); Uwe -- could you do it on Apache? >>>> >>>> 2) the svn->git conversion takes time (fetching SVN revisions) and >>>> incremental mode doesn't play well for some reason... Can I set the >>>> "last commit to SVN" date to: >>>> >>>> ## Friday, 23:59 UTC (that's 4pm PST, if you live on the West coast)? ## >>>> >>>> Then I could start the process to run overnight and start Saturday >>>> morning (CET). You can always create a patch and apply it to git if >>>> you can't make this deadline? >>>> >>>> 3) I'll perform the migration and coordinate >>>> with Infra (Daniel), hopefully >>>> everything is going to be smooth. >>>> >>>> 4) I'll apply Mark's build patches to the git repo (master, branch_5x), >>>> once >>>> it's moved. >>>> >>>> 5) restoring Jenkinses (with configuration changes) and helping in >>>> getting them to run smoothly would be, again, very much appreciated. >>>> >>>> I haven't written those "git introductory steps" yet, but I'll try to >>>> get to it during the weekend. >>>> >>>> Dawid >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 7:43 PM, Anshum Gupta <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> +1 to a 5.5 release. I really think we should do a deprecation release >>>>> before 6.0, and that may/may not be 5.5. >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 11:17 PM, Robert Muir <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> one idea, we could use it to our advantage: as soon as we go to git, >>>>>> immediately (e.g. after just a few days or whatever) start a 5.5 >>>>>> release? >>>>>> >>>>>> besides keeping things less confusing, it could make the 6.0 release >>>>>> more easygoing. because we'd have already worked through the pain of >>>>>> release process and tooling changes with a technically "easier" >>>>>> release otherwise. IMO basically a major release is hard enough on its >>>>>> own, we might want to separate the two things... >>>>>> >>>>>> basically we'd suffer the one-time pain of "first git release" >>>>>> immediately up-front, when svn->git is fresh in our minds. after that >>>>>> first release its on the wiki and no big deal... >>>>>> >>>>>> guess there are downsides to this idea too, e.g. it'd be effort that >>>>>> could be spent on 6.0, having to backport git build system changes to >>>>>> 5.x, etc. >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 6:58 PM, Shawn Heisey >>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> All indications I've seen are that there will be no 5.5 release, that >>>>>>> once >>>>>>> the git transition is complete, the focus will be on stabilizing the >>>>>>> 6.0 >>>>>>> release. Is this a correct statement? There are quite a lot of >>>>>>> things >>>>>>> mentioned in the 5.5 section of CHANGES.txt, plenty for a minor >>>>>>> release. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If we are abandoning work on branch_5x, I am OK with it, I'm just >>>>>>> looking >>>>>>> for information. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>> Shawn >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ________________________________ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ________________________________ >>>>>> >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Anshum >>>>> Gupta >>>> >>>> >>>> ________________________________ >>>> >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Uwe Schindler >>> H.-H.-Meier-Allee 63, 28213 Bremen >>> http://www.thetaphi.de >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
