Geert Janssens writes:
> On 14-08-12 16:11, Derek Atkins wrote:
I just still feel that the master repo should be on code, and that the
committers should be able to push there. Then it can sync to github for
everyone else.
I suppose it could work in reverse, where the com
On 14-08-12 16:11, Derek Atkins wrote:
I just still feel that the master repo should be on code, and that the
committers should be able to push there. Then it can sync to github for
everyone else.
I suppose it could work in reverse, where the committers push to github
master and then code pulls
Yawar Amin writes:
> Hi Derek,
>
> On 2012-08-13, at 13:55, Derek Atkins wrote:
>
>> If nothing else it would
>> reduce my bandwitdh consumption significantly ;)
>
> Yes, I was thinking about this too :-)
It's mostly an issue when someone does a git-svn clone ;)
>> I just still feel that the m
Hi Derek,
On 2012-08-13, at 13:55, Derek Atkins wrote:
> If nothing else it would
> reduce my bandwitdh consumption significantly ;)
Yes, I was thinking about this too :-)
> I just still feel that the master repo should be on code, and that the
> committers should be able to push there. Then
Yawar Amin writes:
> Folks,
>
> On 2012-08-13, at 9:31, Derek Atkins wrote:
>
>> We're still maintaining our server for email, wiki, build, docs, irc
>> logs, etc. So we're already doing system maintenance, and moving to
>> github doesn't really reduce the amount of configuration necessary. We
Folks,
On 2012-08-13, at 9:31, Derek Atkins wrote:
> We're still maintaining our server for email, wiki, build, docs, irc
> logs, etc. So we're already doing system maintenance, and moving to
> github doesn't really reduce the amount of configuration necessary. We
> would just need to add the
John Ralls writes:
> I actually agree with Christian here, simply because while I
> appreciate Derek's efforts to maintain access, large hosting
> operations in large data centers like Github, Sourceforge, or even
> Gnome have better uptime than Derek's house.
I'll just point out that SourceForg
Christian Stimming writes:
>> Any chance we could rename this "Git Migration" instead of "Github
>> Migration"? I don't think we will ever full migrate fully to github. I
>> just think it's a bad idea to let go of master.
>
> Actually this point is one where IMHO there is not a consensus about
On 12 August 2012 21:48, Christian Stimming wrote:
> ...
> I remember you have always voiced very clearly you prefer to host the master
> repository on a server that's controlled by one of the gnucash team. But
> actually I think differently about this point and would prefer to host the
> master r
tkins"
Subject: Git Migration: where to host the master repository
Date: Sun, Aug 12, 2012 5:13 PM
On Aug 12, 2012, at 1:48 PM, Christian Stimming wrote:
> Am Samstag, 11. August 2012, 14:36:18 schrieb Derek Atkins:
>> Geert Janssens writes:
>>> On 11-08-12 12:48, Frank H.
On Aug 12, 2012, at 1:48 PM, Christian Stimming wrote:
> Am Samstag, 11. August 2012, 14:36:18 schrieb Derek Atkins:
>> Geert Janssens writes:
>>> On 11-08-12 12:48, Frank H. Ellenberger wrote:
Hoi,
Am 11.08.2012 12:17, schrieb Geert Janssens:
> I have created a wiki page to
Am Samstag, 11. August 2012, 14:36:18 schrieb Derek Atkins:
> Geert Janssens writes:
> > On 11-08-12 12:48, Frank H. Ellenberger wrote:
> >> Hoi,
> >>
> >> Am 11.08.2012 12:17, schrieb Geert Janssens:
> >>> I have created a wiki page to track the progress of our git
> >>> migration.
> >>> It curr
12 matches
Mail list logo
