TeamGit is a really nice gui to git
2010/6/19, Jarod Wilson :
> On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 7:53 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
>> On Sat, 2010-06-19 at 01:08 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>>> Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
>>> > Fedpkg should hide the GIT details from you.
>>>
>>> But it's a command-line tool. Cervi
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 7:53 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-06-19 at 01:08 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
>> > Fedpkg should hide the GIT details from you.
>>
>> But it's a command-line tool. Cervisia (what I use on the CVS repos) is a
>> GUI.
>>
>> Kevin Kof
On Sat, 2010-06-19 at 01:08 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> > Fedpkg should hide the GIT details from you.
>
> But it's a command-line tool. Cervisia (what I use on the CVS repos) is a
> GUI.
>
> Kevin Kofler
>
fedpkg is also a library, where all the interesting t
Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
> Fedpkg should hide the GIT details from you.
But it's a command-line tool. Cervisia (what I use on the CVS repos) is a
GUI.
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Count me as not excited.
>
> As I already pointed out several times, I don't see anything obviously wrong
> with our CVS setup, so I don't see what we have to gain from switching to
> one of the hardest to use SCM systems out there.
Linus can tell you everything that is wrong
On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 03:59:15PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 01:05:38AM +0530, Rakesh Pandit wrote:
> > I second that, unless there are some obvious advantages which I cannot
> > see. In case there are some it would be great if they get mentioned in
> > https://fedorapr
On Sat, 2010-06-12 at 21:39 +0200, Jochen Schmitt wrote:
> It's seems, that this feature is not implemented in the current
> fedora-packager package.
>
> when I try to make a fedpkg cloone --branches I will get only
> a message which describe the function for this command without
> any visible res
On Mon, 2010-06-14 at 13:01 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>
> Is the effort to make it easy to build RPM's directly from git tags
> related to this or is that a separate project?
That's a different project, and even then we will likely need to
construct a source tarball at some point in the proce
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 01:01:16PM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 06/11/2010 03:14 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > It's been a while since I last updated folks on dist-git, and in reality
> > it's been a while since I last worked on it. Fedora 13 took up all my
> > time.
> >
> > Since my last upda
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 09:58:01AM +0100, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 6:35 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On Sat, 2010-06-12 at 08:22 +0200, Iain Arnell wrote:
> >> On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 11:57 PM, Jesse Keating
> >> wrote:
> >> > The current url is
> >> > pkgs.stg.fedoraproje
Peter Robinson wrote, at 06/14/2010 05:58 PM +9:00:
> On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 6:35 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
>> On Sat, 2010-06-12 at 08:22 +0200, Iain Arnell wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 11:57 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
The current url is
pkgs.stg.fedoraproject.org/and that work
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 6:35 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-06-12 at 08:22 +0200, Iain Arnell wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 11:57 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
>> > The current url is
>> > pkgs.stg.fedoraproject.org/ and that works with git:// and
>> > ssh://.
>>
>> Any chance of making
Christof Damian writes:
> One question though: will it be possible to create a git repository
> local for packages which are going through the review process (or even
> before that for private packages) and then push this to fedora once
> the review is approved?
You can probably just merge your
Jesse Keating writes:
> I hadn't planned on it. Is there really a need for this? Read only via
> http is do-able, but undesirable. Write via https is going to be a long
> shot.
Recent git supports the smart protocol over http/https, both for fetch
and push.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, sch.
Jesse Keating writes:
> (people with existing clones will have to blow them away and
> re-clone),
Doing git fetch and git reset --hard should be enough.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, sch...@redhat.com
GPG Key fingerprint = D4E8 DBE3 3813 BB5D FA84 5EC7 45C6 250E 6F00 984E
"And now for somethin
On 06/11/2010 03:14 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> It's been a while since I last updated folks on dist-git, and in reality
> it's been a while since I last worked on it. Fedora 13 took up all my
> time.
>
> Since my last update we've made great progress on fedpkg, the new tool
> that will replace the
On Sunday, June 13, 2010 06:54:37 pm Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Jesse Keating wrote:
> > I hope you are all as excited as I am about this!
>
> Count me as not excited.
>
> As I already pointed out several times, I don't see anything obviously
> wrong with our CVS setup, so I don't see what we have to
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 7:35 AM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-06-12 at 08:22 +0200, Iain Arnell wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 11:57 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
>> > The current url is
>> > pkgs.stg.fedoraproject.org/ and that works with git:// and
>> > ssh://.
>>
>> Any chance of making
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 23:57, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-06-11 at 17:21 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
>>
> Not necessary at all. The current url is
> pkgs.stg.fedoraproject.org/ and that works with git:// and
> ssh://. One advantage to using fedpkg clone is that if you like the
> current d
On Sun, 2010-06-13 at 17:26 +0100, Christopher Brown wrote:
> Hi Jesse,
>
> On 11 June 2010 22:57, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On Fri, 2010-06-11 at 17:21 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
> >>
> >> Is it necessary to do fedpkg clone ?
> >> Or can regular git be used ?
> >>
> >>
> > Not necessary at all. Th
On Sat, 2010-06-12 at 08:22 +0200, Iain Arnell wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 11:57 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > The current url is
> > pkgs.stg.fedoraproject.org/ and that works with git:// and
> > ssh://.
>
> Any chance of making that work with http:// and https:// (for pushes) too?
>
I ha
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 01:05:38AM +0530, Rakesh Pandit wrote:
> I second that, unless there are some obvious advantages which I cannot
> see. In case there are some it would be great if they get mentioned in
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Dist_Git_Proposal
Linked from there:
Current Pain Poi
On 13 June 2010 22:24, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Jesse Keating wrote:
>> I hope you are all as excited as I am about this!
>
> Count me as not excited.
>
> As I already pointed out several times, I don't see anything obviously wrong
> with our CVS setup, so I don't see what we have to gain from switchi
Jesse Keating wrote:
> I hope you are all as excited as I am about this!
Count me as not excited.
As I already pointed out several times, I don't see anything obviously wrong
with our CVS setup, so I don't see what we have to gain from switching to
one of the hardest to use SCM systems out ther
Hi Jesse,
On 11 June 2010 22:57, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-06-11 at 17:21 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
>>
>> Is it necessary to do fedpkg clone ?
>> Or can regular git be used ?
>>
>>
> Not necessary at all. The current url is
> pkgs.stg.fedoraproject.org/ and that works with git:// and
>
Am 11.06.2010 23:57, schrieb Jesse Keating:
> ssh://. One advantage to using fedpkg clone is that if you like the
> current directory layout where each release is a subdir, you can do
> 'fedpkg clone --branches' and you'll get that layout. You can also do
> fedpkg clone -b and get a checkout of t
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 11:57 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> The current url is
> pkgs.stg.fedoraproject.org/ and that works with git:// and
> ssh://.
Any chance of making that work with http:// and https:// (for pushes) too?
--
Iain.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://a
On Fri, 2010-06-11 at 17:21 -0400, Simo Sorce wrote:
>
> Is it necessary to do fedpkg clone ?
> Or can regular git be used ?
>
>
Not necessary at all. The current url is
pkgs.stg.fedoraproject.org/ and that works with git:// and
ssh://. One advantage to using fedpkg clone is that if you like
On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 14:09:41 -0700
Jesse Keating wrote:
> With dist-git it's slightly different:
>
> fedpkg clone
Is it necessary to do fedpkg clone ?
Or can regular git be used ?
Simo.
--
Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admi
On Fri, 2010-06-11 at 12:46 -0700, Ryan Rix wrote:
> How will this affect current packagers' workflow? Will the changes necessary
> be documented on the wiki? It doesn't seem straight off the bat that this
> would be a drop-in replacement without packagers needing to tweak their
> workflow.
>
On Thu 10 June 2010 2:44:47 pm Jesse Keating wrote:
> It's been a while since I last updated folks on dist-git, and in reality
> it's been a while since I last worked on it. Fedora 13 took up all my
> time.
>
> Since my last update we've made great progress on fedpkg, the new tool
> that will rep
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
> It's been a while since I last updated folks on dist-git, and in reality
> it's been a while since I last worked on it. Fedora 13 took up all my
> time.
>
> Since my last update we've made great progress on fedpkg, the new tool
> that will r
It's been a while since I last updated folks on dist-git, and in reality
it's been a while since I last worked on it. Fedora 13 took up all my
time.
Since my last update we've made great progress on fedpkg, the new tool
that will replace the make system. It is packaged up with
fedora-packager an
33 matches
Mail list logo
