On Saturday 19 August 2006 20:26, David Nusinow wrote:
> > Huh?
> > cd
> > svn export .
> >
> > Works fine here...
>
> I don't get the xsfbs directory. Do you?
Haven't tried in your specific case, but used it quite a few times in
other situations in local checkouts of the d-i repo and also the
On Sun, Aug 20, 2006 at 12:13:52AM +0200, Frans Pop wrote:
> On Saturday 19 August 2006 20:02, David Nusinow wrote:
> > Ok, it doesn't work locally. I guess that's a bug against svn then.
>
> Huh?
> cd
> svn export .
>
> Works fine here...
I don't get the xsfbs directory. Do you?
- David Nus
On Saturday 19 August 2006 20:02, David Nusinow wrote:
> Ok, it doesn't work locally. I guess that's a bug against svn then.
Huh?
cd
svn export .
Works fine here...
pgpf2dejv6idt.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Fri, Aug 18, 2006 at 01:22:00AM +1000, Drew Parsons wrote:
> David wrote:
> > > I'm somewhat confused about the change you made on the svn page about
> > > using export to build and upload to Debian. Export works just fine,
> > > including the xsfbs directory. I think it's a much cleaner appro
David wrote:
> > I'm somewhat confused about the change you made on the svn page about
> > using export to build and upload to Debian. Export works just fine,
> > including the xsfbs directory. I think it's a much cleaner approach
> > than copying the working directory since it ensures you're onl
On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 10:17:28PM +, David Nusinow wrote:
> Ok, I've requested the alioth project. I've also added information about
> the git stuff at http://wiki.debian.org/XStrikeForce/Contrib
It has been created, I copied my docs there:
git clone
ssh://costa.debian.org/srv/git.debian.or
On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 05:20:59PM +1000, Drew Parsons wrote:
> David wrote:
> > Ok, I've requested the alioth project. I've also added information about
> > the git stuff at http://wiki.debian.org/XStrikeForce/Contrib
>
> Thanks for the updates to the wiki.
>
> I'm somewhat confused about the ch
On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 09:31:02PM +, David Nusinow wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 11:16:51AM +0200, Mattia Dongili wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 08:34:59PM +, David Nusinow wrote:
> > [...]
> > > Everyone should feel free to scratch any itch they feel like, but I want
> > > there to
David wrote:
> Ok, I've requested the alioth project. I've also added information about
> the git stuff at http://wiki.debian.org/XStrikeForce/Contrib
Thanks for the updates to the wiki.
I'm somewhat confused about the change you made on the svn page about
using export to build and upload to Debi
On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 09:36:52PM +, David Nusinow wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 09:20:41AM +0200, Denis Barbier wrote:
> > I started writing some documentation (mostly copied from the wiki and
> > READMEs), available via
> > git clone http://people.debian.org/~barbier/git/xsf-docs.git/
>
On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 09:20:41AM +0200, Denis Barbier wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 01:45:59AM +, David Nusinow wrote:
> > As per http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2006/08/msg00599.html we now
> > can use git.debian.org to hook in to alioth and do our work. We don't have
> > any project
On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 10:35:47PM +1000, Drew Parsons wrote:
> David wrote:
> > Please do go back and tag the uploads you made over the past several days
> > though. Those *need* to be done and it's something I plan to actively
> > enforce. Further, I'm going to ask you to not make any more upload
On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 11:16:51AM +0200, Mattia Dongili wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 08:34:59PM +, David Nusinow wrote:
> [...]
> > Everyone should feel free to scratch any itch they feel like, but I want
> > there to be a sense of ownership that's available if people want it.
>
> David,
On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 09:38:33AM +0200, Denis Barbier wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 08:30:32PM +, David Nusinow wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 13, 2006 at 01:39:48PM +0200, Denis Barbier wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 07:23:20PM +, David Nusinow wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > > > I like the pa
David wrote:
> Please do go back and tag the uploads you made over the past several days
> though. Those *need* to be done and it's something I plan to actively
> enforce. Further, I'm going to ask you to not make any more uploads before
> those tags are done. It's ok if you forget them on occasion
On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 08:34:59PM +, David Nusinow wrote:
[...]
> Everyone should feel free to scratch any itch they feel like, but I want
> there to be a sense of ownership that's available if people want it.
David, XSF,
I'm wondering if it makes some sense for you and the XSF to push
xserv
On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 08:30:32PM +, David Nusinow wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 13, 2006 at 01:39:48PM +0200, Denis Barbier wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 07:23:20PM +, David Nusinow wrote:
> > [...]
> > > > I like the patching system that's currently in place.
> > >
> > > Me too. I think the
On Tue, Aug 15, 2006 at 01:45:59AM +, David Nusinow wrote:
> As per http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2006/08/msg00599.html we now
> can use git.debian.org to hook in to alioth and do our work. We don't have
> any projects set up yet, and I'm not sure exactly how this will go down,
> but the
Ok, I think it's time to take stock of it all and lay down some policy:
On Sat, Aug 05, 2006 at 06:12:19PM +, David Nusinow wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
>So we need to talk about how we manage the svn archive and plans for the
> future. Given upstream's move, I think it's pretty apparent that
On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 08:34:59PM +, David Nusinow wrote:
> Everyone should feel free to scratch any itch they feel like, but I want
> there to be a sense of ownership that's available if people want it.
That said, I want to encourage people to take ownership of whatever bits
they're interest
On Sat, Aug 12, 2006 at 09:27:37PM +1000, Drew Parsons wrote:
> > I'd
> > honestly rather keep it all in quilt and chuck the vendor branches (I'll
> > make a firm decision after the weekend on this so that anyone who wants to
> > weigh in has time).
>
> I should 'fess up at this point that I didn'
On Sun, Aug 13, 2006 at 01:48:58PM +0200, Denis Barbier wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 07:15:21PM +, David Nusinow wrote:
> [...]
> > I need to clean out the uploaders fields of packages, but basically my
> > policy on the issue is that the uploaders field defines who is the person
> > taking
On Sun, Aug 13, 2006 at 01:39:48PM +0200, Denis Barbier wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 07:23:20PM +, David Nusinow wrote:
> [...]
> > > I like the patching system that's currently in place.
> >
> > Me too. I think the consensus is to keep it, although I think pushing the
> > logic in to the
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 07:15:21PM +, David Nusinow wrote:
[...]
> I need to clean out the uploaders fields of packages, but basically my
> policy on the issue is that the uploaders field defines who is the person
> taking final responsibility within the XSF for the package. If you just
> want
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 07:23:20PM +, David Nusinow wrote:
[...]
> > I like the patching system that's currently in place.
>
> Me too. I think the consensus is to keep it, although I think pushing the
> logic in to the quilt package is wise.
Can you please explain the last part of this senten
> I'd
> honestly rather keep it all in quilt and chuck the vendor branches (I'll
> make a firm decision after the weekend on this so that anyone who wants to
> weigh in has time).
I should 'fess up at this point that I didn't bother updating vendor
for my most recent upgrades (libxi and libxaw I t
Denis Barbier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Here are some things that annoy me:
> * Flood of SVN commits to debian-x.
> I can use a procmail rule to filter them, but I often browse web
> archives. See for instance current archive:
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-x/2006/08/thread
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 07:15:21PM +, David Nusinow wrote:
[...]
> > So David, do what you want, I have no strong opinion on anything related to
> > SCM, but please let us have fun. This is surely what you want too, I hope
> > it will happen soon.
>
> I'm truly sorry you feel that way. I had
On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 08:37:55PM +, David Nusinow wrote:
> Now with the modular tree, I'm willing to keep it all in the repo,
> depending on how things go. If git really does help us to push changes
> upstream, and I'm able to do this frequently and keep our patch number
> down, stopping quil
On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 11:50:55AM +0200, Christan Chiesa wrote:
> hello,
>
> OK, first of all i introduce myself as no one know me and i never did
> something for X :). I'm Christian, I'm not a Debian Developer but, for
> the moment, I'm the maintainer of some packages (all packages
> maintained
On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 07:53:13AM +0300, Daniel Stone wrote:
> Oh, if you're committing it anyway, then that works too, but if you have
> it in git, then given that all you need is 'git push origin' (to push
> everything), or whatever, then the barrier to entry for you is lowered a
> great deal, a
On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 11:29:06PM +0200, Denis Barbier wrote:
> I use patch systems for some of my own packages, so am not against their
> use, but we must realize that external people have valid arguments
> against this use.
That's fair. I acknowledge that, and I admit that quilt isn't the be-al
On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 10:34:39PM +0200, Denis Barbier wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 07:53:13AM +0300, Daniel Stone wrote:
> [...]
> > > Yeah, getting all our patches merged upstream is of course a goal of mine,
> > > so this is heartening. Just out of curiosity, how would git be more
> > > he
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 07:30:14PM +, David Nusinow wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 06, 2006 at 07:04:28PM +1000, Drew Parsons wrote:
[...]
> > Like you, I tend to feel keeping explicitly separate patches makes for
> > a cleaner solution when dealing with upstream source the size of
> > X.org. Otherwise
On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 07:53:13AM +0300, Daniel Stone wrote:
[...]
> > Yeah, getting all our patches merged upstream is of course a goal of mine,
> > so this is heartening. Just out of curiosity, how would git be more helpful
> > than producing a diff and applying it to the upstream tree, followed
hello,
OK, first of all i introduce myself as no one know me and i never did
something for X :). I'm Christian, I'm not a Debian Developer but, for
the moment, I'm the maintainer of some packages (all packages
maintained by Riccardo Setti, he's busy at the moment) and I'm
interested in X :)
I us
On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 10:12:42AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> I think I'm becoming a relatively experienced git user, but I
> have very little experience with administration of a shared repository.
> We'd probably need an actual guru like Keith Packard for that, at least
> initially until we've
On Tue, 2006-08-08 at 19:36 +, David Nusinow wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 04:14:33PM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> > On Tue, 2006-08-08 at 15:40 +0300, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > >
> > > If the eventual goal is to get all the patches merged upstream -- and I
> > > really hope it is -- then tr
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 07:33:10PM +, David Nusinow wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 03:40:18PM +0300, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > FWIW, my vote (now from a purely upstream perspective) is to go with
> > git, despite my public reservations about git at the time we moved.
> >
> > If the eventual go
> Christian, I appreciate your concern, but I can assure you that learning
> to use git is worth it. :) Especially if you're not familiar with any
> other truly decentralized SCM.
Hmmm, well, I already had to learn tla, then baz, then bzr and I also
use darcs, so I tend to accumulate experience w
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 04:14:33PM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-08-08 at 15:40 +0300, Daniel Stone wrote:
> >
> > If the eventual goal is to get all the patches merged upstream -- and I
> > really hope it is -- then tracking git makes this infinitely easier, and
> > infinitely more a
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 03:40:18PM +0300, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 07:26:46AM -0500, Christian Perrier wrote:
> > /me dances happily when learning that I will have to learn Yet Another
> > Source Control Management System if I want to continue maintaining the
> > debconf l10n.
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 07:26:46AM -0500, Christian Perrier wrote:
> Quoting David Nusinow ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> >So we need to talk about how we manage the svn archive and plans for the
> > future. Given upstream's move, I think it's pretty apparent that if we are
> > go
On Sun, Aug 06, 2006 at 07:04:28PM +1000, Drew Parsons wrote:
> David wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> >So we need to talk about how we manage the svn archive and plans for the
> > future. Given upstream's move, I think it's pretty apparent that if we are
> > going to change our repository, it's
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 03:59:13AM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 05, 2006 at 06:12:19PM +, David Nusinow wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> [...]
> > he's got a lot of experience. Either way, I'm 100% unwilling to do any sort
> > of switch until after we're frozen for etch, and even then th
On Wed, Aug 09, 2006 at 12:35:11AM +0200, Denis Barbier wrote:
> External xsfbs modules are also time-consuming. I rant against them whenever
> I do an update of the whole tree ;)
I agree, but I don't have a better solution for it yet. Perhaps git offers
something similar but superior? Alternatel
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 03:59:13AM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 05, 2006 at 06:12:19PM +, David Nusinow wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> [...]
> > he's got a lot of experience. Either way, I'm 100% unwilling to do any sort
> > of switch until after we're frozen for etch, and even then th
On Tue, 2006-08-08 at 15:40 +0300, Daniel Stone wrote:
>
> If the eventual goal is to get all the patches merged upstream -- and I
> really hope it is -- then tracking git makes this infinitely easier, and
> infinitely more appealing from both sides to do so.
+1
It should simplify maintenance in
On Tue, Aug 08, 2006 at 07:26:46AM -0500, Christian Perrier wrote:
> /me dances happily when learning that I will have to learn Yet Another
> Source Control Management System if I want to continue maintaining the
> debconf l10n.
>
> Sure, this is a very minor aspect of the development of X packag
Quoting David Nusinow ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Hi everyone,
>
>So we need to talk about how we manage the svn archive and plans for the
> future. Given upstream's move, I think it's pretty apparent that if we are
> going to change our repository, it's going to be to git. Since a number of
/me
On Sat, Aug 05, 2006 at 06:12:19PM +, David Nusinow wrote:
> Hi everyone,
[...]
> he's got a lot of experience. Either way, I'm 100% unwilling to do any sort
> of switch until after we're frozen for etch, and even then there are issues
> like where to host it that need to be solved.
>
I've co
David wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
>So we need to talk about how we manage the svn archive and plans for the
> future. Given upstream's move, I think it's pretty apparent that if we are
> going to change our repository, it's going to be to git. Since a number of
> people are clamoring for that, I t
Hi everyone,
So we need to talk about how we manage the svn archive and plans for the
future. Given upstream's move, I think it's pretty apparent that if we are
going to change our repository, it's going to be to git. Since a number of
people are clamoring for that, I think it's a safe bet that
53 matches
Mail list logo
