On 03/09/2012 03:20 PM, Stephan Witt wrote:
Am 09.03.2012 um 20:18 schrieb Richard Heck:
On 03/09/2012 11:06 AM, Stephan Witt wrote:
Ok, here comes the patch. If anybody can give it a try - especially on Windows
- I'm interested in the result. Otherwise I'll commit it on Sunday or so...
I've
Am 09.03.2012 um 20:18 schrieb Richard Heck:
> On 03/09/2012 11:06 AM, Stephan Witt wrote:
>>
>> Ok, here comes the patch. If anybody can give it a try - especially on
>> Windows - I'm interested in the result. Otherwise I'll commit it on Sunday
>> or so... I've introduced the FileName::parentP
On 03/09/2012 11:06 AM, Stephan Witt wrote:
Ok, here comes the patch. If anybody can give it a try - especially on
Windows - I'm interested in the result. Otherwise I'll commit it on
Sunday or so... I've introduced the FileName::parentPath() method to
avoid the infinite loop when FileName::on
Am 07.03.2012 um 19:16 schrieb Richard Heck:
> On 03/07/2012 09:32 AM, Stephan Witt wrote:
>> Am 07.03.2012 um 15:15 schrieb Pavel Sanda:
>>
>>> Stephan Witt wrote:
>>>> I don't like hard-coding the knowledge how subversion developers organize
>&
Am 08.03.2012 um 11:41 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes:
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 3:15 PM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
>> Stephan Witt wrote:
>>> I don't like hard-coding the knowledge how subversion developers organize
>>> their meta-data.
>>
>> More thoughts - w
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 3:15 PM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> Stephan Witt wrote:
>> I don't like hard-coding the knowledge how subversion developers organize
>> their meta-data.
>
> More thoughts - what about this proposal:
> 1. We completely kill parsing of 1.6 metadata i
Stephan Witt wrote:
> 1. and 2. (minus --xml) is essentially my already existing patch.
> 3. is a thing I can live with
>
> Now we're all happy, aren't we? :)
Yes, thanks :)
Pavel
On 03/07/2012 09:32 AM, Stephan Witt wrote:
Am 07.03.2012 um 15:15 schrieb Pavel Sanda:
Stephan Witt wrote:
I don't like hard-coding the knowledge how subversion developers organize their
meta-data.
More thoughts - what about this proposal:
1. We completely kill parsing of 1.6 metada
Am 07.03.2012 um 15:15 schrieb Pavel Sanda:
> Stephan Witt wrote:
>> I don't like hard-coding the knowledge how subversion developers organize
>> their meta-data.
>
> More thoughts - what about this proposal:
> 1. We completely kill parsing of 1.6 metadata in .svn
Stephan Witt wrote:
> I don't like hard-coding the knowledge how subversion developers organize
> their meta-data.
More thoughts - what about this proposal:
1. We completely kill parsing of 1.6 metadata in .svn.
2. If possible than write common routine for both 1.6/1.7 (I assume the
Stephan Witt wrote:
> > It would work but it implies external svn call(s) for each opened files no
> > matter whether the file
> > is under the control :-/ I'm not much happy, but you are the boss now...
>
> I don't like hard-coding the knowledge how subversion
for svn client version again and again. If it is 1.6.x we're done
with it.
>> b) use the external svn call to check the status of the files?
>
> It would work but it implies external svn call(s) for each opened files no
> matter whether the file
> is under the control :-/ I&
Stephan Witt wrote:
> > Stephan, do you still have some time to look on this? I mean
> > a) some routine to check existence of parental .svn for 1.7 SVN
> > b) in case a) succeeds external svn call to check file being under SVN
> > control
> > (a&b perhaps just as fallback to current current che
Am 03.03.2012 um 20:36 schrieb Pavel Sanda:
> Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
>
>> Stephan Witt wrote:
>>> second bad news is that i'm short of time these weeks to debug it :)
>>
>> Do you know more about the details? Perhaps I can do something about that.
>
> Stephan, do you still have some time to
Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
> Well, why don't you look in the git source. They will have found a robust
> way to do this.
Of course linking to their library would be best.
one day :)
Pavel
In case a) is written in general way (bool checkparentdirs(".svn"))
the doors for basic git support in LyX are opened (I guess one weekend
coding& debugging).
Well, why don't you look in the git source. They will have found a robust way
to do this.
Vincent
mount point freezes and unrelated application freezes
> >>> as well.
> | the whole problem arised because "just checking" .svn dir in the current
> folder
> | is no more possible with subversion 1.7.
>
> Hmm... but we would only traverse up, i.e. in the path we are
Pavel Sanda writes:
| Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> Le 26/10/2011 15:01, Pavel Sanda a écrit :
>>> the whole problem arised because "just checking" .svn dir in the current
>>> folder
>>> is no more possible with subversion 1.7.
>>
>> Be
g manual checkout)
>>> so asking for one more checkbox does not look so horrid.
>>
>> We could just check whether the .svn directory exists and say: "it seems
>> that this file is versionned under svn. Enable svn support?" (or somebeter
>> wording).
>
. I even tried that some time ago. It does not look
| too bad, but I never finished it.
We should not look into .git/.svn at all, at the most we should look for
those dirs. Or we can let the tools do that for us.
If we used a small plug-in thingie we could have that link with the
subversi
On 26/10/2011 21:56, Georg Baum wrote:
Pavel Sanda wrote:
it just feels wrong. when document has 10 childern we will execute it 10
times. when we introduce git then 20 times? if some win user has firewall
will we ask about execution of svn/git binary upon opening lyx manual for
the first time a
Georg Baum wrote:
> Parsing internal svn files from LyX looks as wrong to me as starting the svn
> client a dozen times. A better solution would be to use svn not as a binary,
> but link to the library. I even tried that some time ago. It does not look
> too bad, but I never finished it.
yep, t
Pavel Sanda wrote:
> it just feels wrong. when document has 10 childern we will execute it 10
> times. when we introduce git then 20 times? if some win user has firewall
> will we ask about execution of svn/git binary upon opening lyx manual for
> the first time after lyx is launched and so on...
ter
>> wording).
>
> the whole problem arised because "just checking" .svn dir in the current
> folder
> is no more possible with subversion 1.7.
>
> anyway i'm not going to fight this issue. it just feels wrong to launch such
> machinery for file openi
Am 26.10.2011 um 16:21 schrieb Enrico Forestieri:
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 04:02:08PM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote:
>> Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
>>> So I'm happy they finally saw the light.
>>
>> :) if one seeks the light he should probably switch to git...
>>
>> breaking older things to work m
On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 04:02:08PM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
> > So I'm happy they finally saw the light.
>
> :) if one seeks the light he should probably switch to git...
>
> breaking older things to work means perhaps one reason less
> to continue to use svn at a
Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
> So I'm happy they finally saw the light.
:) if one seeks the light he should probably switch to git...
breaking older things to work means perhaps one reason less
to continue to use svn at all.
p
Op 26-10-2011 15:45, Pavel Sanda schreef:
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Le 26/10/2011 15:01, Pavel Sanda a écrit :
the whole problem arised because "just checking" .svn dir in the current
folder
is no more possible with subversion 1.7.
Because only the top svn directory has informat
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Le 26/10/2011 15:01, Pavel Sanda a écrit :
>> the whole problem arised because "just checking" .svn dir in the current
>> folder
>> is no more possible with subversion 1.7.
>
> Because only the top svn directory has information, r
Le 26/10/2011 15:01, Pavel Sanda a écrit :
the whole problem arised because "just checking" .svn dir in the current folder
is no more possible with subversion 1.7.
Because only the top svn directory has information, right?
JMarc
does not look so horrid.
>
> We could just check whether the .svn directory exists and say: "it seems
> that this file is versionned under svn. Enable svn support?" (or somebeter
> wording).
the whole problem arised because "just checking" .svn dir in the current
Op 26-10-2011 14:52, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes schreef:
Le 26/10/2011 14:37, Pavel Sanda a écrit :
i have painful experience with applications which scan neighbourhood
of the folders you are working in case you are working in networked
filesystem. one mount point freezes and unrelated application fre
Le 26/10/2011 14:37, Pavel Sanda a écrit :
i have painful experience with applications which scan neighbourhood
of the folders you are working in case you are working in networked
filesystem. one mount point freezes and unrelated application freezes
as well.
considering that svn is used by small
Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
> Against all, unless you convince me this that this option really can't be
> enabled always. I'm afraid this will become just another option that should
> be there out of principle, but isn't ever used by the user.
>
>>> there is absolutely no reason to disable it f
Op 26-10-2011 13:41, Pavel Sanda schreef:
Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
Stephan
I'm in favor of having some better settings for the version control
system(s), but I don't like to have another option whether to use VCS or
not.
you are against general "use vcs" or against
Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
>> Stephan
> I'm in favor of having some better settings for the version control
> system(s), but I don't like to have another option whether to use VCS or
> not.
you are against general "use vcs" or against "subversion supp
Op 26-10-2011 13:03, Stephan Witt schreef:
Am 26.10.2011 um 12:05 schrieb Pavel Sanda:
Stephan Witt wrote:
Pavel, I've tested this patch with 1.7 SVN and on Linux with 1.6.
Because I've only the LYX SVN repository at hand I don't want to test
all operations. But the detection of SVN repository
Am 26.10.2011 um 12:05 schrieb Pavel Sanda:
> Stephan Witt wrote:
>>> Pavel, I've tested this patch with 1.7 SVN and on Linux with 1.6.
>>> Because I've only the LYX SVN repository at hand I don't want to test
>>> all operations. But the detection of SVN repository members is working now.
>>
>> I
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Can't we just read the local files? I agree that network access when
> opening a file is wrong.
i believe svn will only access local files (though i didn't test).
pavel
Le 26/10/2011 12:21, Pavel Sanda a écrit :
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Le 26/10/2011 12:05, Pavel Sanda a écrit :
i feel uneasy about this stuff being executed for opening each lyx file
(the same problem as with git), directory traversal is not better.
shall we introduce some gui variable like
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Le 26/10/2011 12:05, Pavel Sanda a écrit :
>> i feel uneasy about this stuff being executed for opening each lyx file
>> (the same problem as with git), directory traversal is not better.
>> shall we introduce some gui variable like "Use revision control systems"
>> or
Le 26/10/2011 12:05, Pavel Sanda a écrit :
i feel uneasy about this stuff being executed for opening each lyx file
(the same problem as with git), directory traversal is not better.
shall we introduce some gui variable like "Use revision control systems"
or am i oversensitive?
Is it a matter of
Stephan Witt wrote:
> > Pavel, I've tested this patch with 1.7 SVN and on Linux with 1.6.
> > Because I've only the LYX SVN repository at hand I don't want to test
> > all operations. But the detection of SVN repository members is working now.
>
> I missed some status flag: "I" stands for ignore.
Hi all :
The folder.svn in version 1.7 has two subfolders pristine and tmp, while
the.svnversion 1.6, I remember several subfolders, such
as propdel, propset and three more that are handled
by LyX. When accessing LyX to the version 1.7 is all completelychanged.
Regards
Miguel
Am 24.10.2011 um 17:11 schrieb Buenas Noticias:
> I don't know make these. I am a normal user, what discover a problem in
> the svn version control.
>
You're able to upgrade your SVN to 1.7 and cannot create a ticket in our
trac-system?
Did you try it already?
Stephan
> El 24/10/11 17:05, Ste
I don't know make these. I am a normal user, what discover a problem in
the svn version control.
Regards
El 24/10/11 17:05, Stephan Witt escribió:
> Am 24.10.2011 um 16:55 schrieb Buenas Noticias:
>
>> Hi all :
>>
>> I used a repository, made with svn 1.6 and I open my LyX documents, and they
>
Am 24.10.2011 um 16:55 schrieb Buenas Noticias:
> Hi all :
>
> I used a repository, made with svn 1.6 and I open my LyX documents, and they
> worked perfectly. Then I did a svn upgrade to version 1.7 and LyX, you can
> not put them under version control, so I conclude that there is a problem
>
Hi all :
I used a repository, made with svn 1.6 and I open my LyX documents, and
they worked perfectly. Then I did a svn upgrade to version 1.7 and LyX,
you can not put them under version control, so I conclude that there is
a problem with this newversion and the program LyX 2.1.0svn.
Regards
Am 23.10.2011 um 14:15 schrieb Stephan Witt:
> Am 21.10.2011 um 22:25 schrieb Stephan Witt:
>
>> Am 21.10.2011 um 21:38 schrieb Lars Gullik Bjønnes:
>>
>>> Stephan Witt writes:
>>>
>>> | Am 21.10.2011 um 14:09 schrieb Pavel Sanda:
>>>>
Am 21.10.2011 um 22:25 schrieb Stephan Witt:
> Am 21.10.2011 um 21:38 schrieb Lars Gullik Bjønnes:
>
>> Stephan Witt writes:
>>
>> | Am 21.10.2011 um 14:09 schrieb Pavel Sanda:
>>>
>>>> Buenas Noticias wrote:
>>>>> Ok. Subversion 1.
Am 21.10.2011 um 23:30 schrieb Lars Gullik Bjønnes:
> Stephan Witt writes:
>
> | Am 21.10.2011 um 21:38 schrieb Lars Gullik Bjønnes:
>>
>>> Stephan Witt writes:
>>>
>>> | Am 21.10.2011 um 14:09 schrieb Pavel Sanda:
>>>>
>>>>
Stephan Witt writes:
| Am 21.10.2011 um 21:38 schrieb Lars Gullik Bjønnes:
>
>> Stephan Witt writes:
>>
>> | Am 21.10.2011 um 14:09 schrieb Pavel Sanda:
>>>
>>>> Buenas Noticias wrote:
>>>>> Ok. Subversion 1.7 is incompatible with LyX.
Am 21.10.2011 um 21:38 schrieb Lars Gullik Bjønnes:
> Stephan Witt writes:
>
> | Am 21.10.2011 um 14:09 schrieb Pavel Sanda:
>>
>>> Buenas Noticias wrote:
>>>> Ok. Subversion 1.7 is incompatible with LyX.
>>>
>>> maybe i was wrong and
Stephan Witt writes:
| Am 21.10.2011 um 14:09 schrieb Pavel Sanda:
>
>> Buenas Noticias wrote:
>>> Ok. Subversion 1.7 is incompatible with LyX.
>>
>> maybe i was wrong and problem is not with lyx per se.
>> can you please try again with completely new repo
Am 21.10.2011 um 20:21 schrieb Stephan Witt:
> Am 21.10.2011 um 14:09 schrieb Pavel Sanda:
>
>> Buenas Noticias wrote:
>>> Ok. Subversion 1.7 is incompatible with LyX.
>>
>> maybe i was wrong and problem is not with lyx per se.
>> can you please try again
Am 21.10.2011 um 14:09 schrieb Pavel Sanda:
> Buenas Noticias wrote:
>> Ok. Subversion 1.7 is incompatible with LyX.
>
> maybe i was wrong and problem is not with lyx per se.
> can you please try again with completely new repo (checkout from 1.7)
> or upgrade as stated
Am 21.10.2011 um 14:09 schrieb Pavel Sanda:
> Buenas Noticias wrote:
>> Ok. Subversion 1.7 is incompatible with LyX.
>
> maybe i was wrong and problem is not with lyx per se.
> can you please try again with completely new repo (checkout from 1.7)
> or upgrade as stated by En
Hi Pavel :
I made a test document, and all commands to get a working copy. In the
beginning everything is fine, but the icons are not activatedin LyXand I
can not use the svn version control.
Miguel
El 21/10/11 14:09, Pavel Sanda escribió:
> Buenas Noticias wrote:
>> Ok. Subversi
Buenas Noticias wrote:
> Ok. Subversion 1.7 is incompatible with LyX.
maybe i was wrong and problem is not with lyx per se.
can you please try again with completely new repo (checkout from 1.7)
or upgrade as stated by Enrico?
pavel
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 10:38:51AM +0200, Buenas Noticias wrote:
> Ok. Subversion 1.7 is incompatible with LyX. Subversion 1.6 work fine.
> Now I can not put my documents under version control with the 1.7, so
> if I could do with the 1.6 version.
This is not true. Please,
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 09:09:00AM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> Stephan Witt wrote:
> > Do you know more about the details? Perhaps I can do something about that.
>
> no, first time i hear about that. one needs to install svn 1.7 and see whats
> going on...
Subversion 1.7 does
Ok. Subversion 1.7 is incompatible with LyX. Subversion 1.6 work fine.
Now I can not put my documents under version control with the 1.7, so
if I could do with the 1.6 version.
Regards
Miguel
El 21/10/11 08:40, Pavel Sanda escribió:
> Buenas Noticias wrote:
>> Hi all :
>>
&g
Stephan Witt wrote:
> Do you know more about the details? Perhaps I can do something about that.
no, first time i hear about that. one needs to install svn 1.7 and see whats
going on...
pavel
everything has worked fine, but when Mandriva upgrade subversion to
>> 1.7.0, it stopped working. The LyX Tutorial says that svn was tested
>> with versions 1.4 and 1.6 working well. Any idea to work with 1.7.0?.
>> I can not go back to 1.6.0 because the dependency system prevents me
Stephan Witt wrote:
> Perhaps it's the same with Mandriva 1.7?
i think he speaks about svn versions.
pavel
Buenas Noticias wrote:
> Hi all :
>
> I am using LyX 2.1.0svn and treatment versions with svn. So far
> everything has worked fine, but when Mandriva upgrade subversion to
> 1.7.0, it stopped working. The LyX Tutorial says that svn was tested
> with versions 1.4 and 1.6 working
Am 21.10.2011 um 08:17 schrieb Buenas Noticias:
> Hi all :
>
> I am using LyX 2.1.0svn and treatment versions with svn. So far
> everything has worked fine, but when Mandriva upgrade subversion to
> 1.7.0, it stopped working. The LyX Tutorial says that svn was tested
> with ve
Hi all :
I am using LyX 2.1.0svn and treatment versions with svn. So far
everything has worked fine, but when Mandriva upgrade subversion to
1.7.0, it stopped working. The LyX Tutorial says that svn was tested
with versions 1.4 and 1.6 working well. Any idea to work with 1.7.0?.
I can not go back
On Tue, 19 May 2009, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Jürgen Spitzmüller writes:
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Could you set that only the developers can add/remove keywords and set the
target milestone? People are frequently using the keyword field now, and in
most cases, the keywords are not very
Jürgen Spitzmüller writes:
> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Could you set that only the developers can add/remove keywords and set the
> target milestone? People are frequently using the keyword field now, and in
> most cases, the keywords are not very useful.
I took a look at this, but did not
On Tue, 12 May 2009, Pavel Sanda wrote:
I think I now know how to give people write/commit permission to
Subversion and Trac.
It's now working for André, so now I know how to give people access.
cheers
/Christian
--
Christian Ridderström Mobile: +46-70 687 39 44
Could you set that only the developers can add/remove keywords and
set the
target milestone? People are frequently using the keyword field now,
and in
most cases, the keywords are not very useful.
I do not think that I can do it from the web interface. I have to wait
until
I have real acc
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> Note that there's a step missing regarding Trac. Someone needs to
>> configure what permissions the newly create user shall have within
>> Trac. This can be done using the web interface, so I'll leave this for
>> people that actually know what they're doing with Trac
pavel
Christian Ridderström wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think I now know how to give people write/commit permission to Subversion
> and Trac. Below is a list of the people I believe currently has write
> permission. If you're not in any of the list but feel you shoul
Christian Ridderström writes:
> Note that there's a step missing regarding Trac. Someone needs to
> configure what permissions the newly create user shall have within
> Trac. This can be done using the web interface, so I'll leave this for
> people that actually know what they're doing with Trac.
On Mon, 11 May 2009, Christian Ridderström wrote:
Note that I've now sent passwords to André and Edwin, they should test
that it works.
/Christian
--
Christian Ridderström Mobile: +46-70 687 39 44
On Mon, 11 May 2009, Christian Ridderström wrote:
you can have separate passwords for Subversion and Trac. I haven't tested
that thought. Actually, none of this is really tested by me yet:-)
Note that there's a step missing regarding Trac. Someone needs to
configure what permi
Hi,
I think I now know how to give people write/commit permission to
Subversion and Trac. Below is a list of the people I believe currently has
write permission. If you're not in any of the list but feel you should,
send me an email to
christian.ridderstrom AT gmail.com
This
Martin Vermeer writes:
| On Sat, Mar 07, 2009 at 01:53:36PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>> Andre Poenitz
>>
>> writes:
>>
>> | On Sat, Mar 07, 2009 at 11:54:23AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> >> Andre Poenitz writes:
>> >> > How much effort is it to syncronize two svn repos?
>> >
On Sat, Mar 07, 2009 at 01:53:36PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Andre Poenitz
>
> writes:
>
> | On Sat, Mar 07, 2009 at 11:54:23AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> >> Andre Poenitz writes:
> >> > How much effort is it to syncronize two svn repos?
> >>
> >> I do not know whether rsync
> A sub-dump is done every night... from the last full dump until present.
That indicates a lack of communication between us... :-)
> I think that your way of doing the dump might result in a tiny bit more
> manual work required to get it up to date.
It does not matter if we do not need to do th
Bo Peng writes:
>>> I know that, but I was creating a full dump.
>>
>> Que??
>
| A full dump till Thursday, not the previous Sunday...
A sub-dump is done every night... from the last full dump until present.
I think that your way of doing the dump might result in a tiny bit more
manual work req
>> I know that, but I was creating a full dump.
>
> Que??
A full dump till Thursday, not the previous Sunday...
Bo
On Sat, 7 Mar 2009, Bo Peng wrote:
Already done automatically. Full dump is done automatically on aussie
every sunday.
I know that, but I was creating a full dump.
Que??
/C
--
Christian Ridderström Mobile: +46-70 687 39 44
>
> | I do not know such a way, sorry.
>
> I do.
If you would like to re-import the repository so that others do not
have to check out fresh, go ahead. :-)
> Already done automatically. Full dump is done automatically on aussie
> every sunday.
I know that, but I was creating a full dump.
Cheer
Bo Peng writes:
>> | And I really hope you make the dump and import in such a way to just
>> | enble developers to just switch their threes instead of doing a full
>> | new chekcout.
>
| I do not know such a way, sorry.
I do.
| Even if the bzipped dump file is
| 200M, importing still took 10+
u did not count
the time to bzip.
Anyway, the sourceforge subversion repository is running. Because it
is easy to add new revisions (we have seven now), I am happy that I do
not have to do it again.
Cheers,
Bo
Andre Poenitz
writes:
| On Sat, Mar 07, 2009 at 11:54:23AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> Andre Poenitz writes:
>> > How much effort is it to syncronize two svn repos?
>>
>> I do not know whether rsync can do that, or if a svn repo is just a huge
>> file. Bo?
>
| An svn repo a lots of sm
On Sat, Mar 07, 2009 at 11:54:23AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Andre Poenitz writes:
> > How much effort is it to syncronize two svn repos?
>
> I do not know whether rsync can do that, or if a svn repo is just a huge
> file. Bo?
An svn repo a lots of small files, rsync would be fine if
lar...@gullik.org (Lars Gullik Bjønnes)
writes:
| Bo Peng writes:
>
| | I am migrating our subversion repository to sourceforge.net
>>
| | http://lyx.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/lyx/
>>
| | This was meant to be a test migration but I realized that I do not
| | really want to repe
Bo Peng writes:
| I am migrating our subversion repository to sourceforge.net
>
| http://lyx.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/lyx/
>
| This was meant to be a test migration but I realized that I do not
| really want to repeat this process again, which involves 10T of data
| and 10+ hours of w
Andre Poenitz
writes:
| On Sat, Mar 07, 2009 at 09:43:04AM +0100, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
>> Bo Peng wrote:
>> > How about we decide, right now, to switch to sf.net? The subversion
>> > repository will be ready in a few hours (it is at revision 13425 now)
>> &g
Bo Peng writes:
| On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 11:47 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller
| wrote:
>> Bo Peng wrote:
>>> It would be easier for the final
>>> migration if you guys can refrain from committing small patches for a
>>> while. You **might** need to re-commit to the sf repository later.
>>
>> Well, if it
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes writes:
| Andre Poenitz writes:
>> How much effort is it to syncronize two svn repos?
>
| I do not know whether rsync can do that, or if a svn repo is just a huge
| file. Bo?
>
| Otherwise, google shows stuff like this
| http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/trunk/notes/svnsync.tx
Andre Poenitz writes:
> How much effort is it to syncronize two svn repos?
I do not know whether rsync can do that, or if a svn repo is just a huge
file. Bo?
Otherwise, google shows stuff like this
http://svn.collab.net/repos/svn/trunk/notes/svnsync.txt
http://lajavaloca.wordpress.com/2008/06/03
On Sat, Mar 07, 2009 at 09:43:04AM +0100, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> Bo Peng wrote:
> > How about we decide, right now, to switch to sf.net? The subversion
> > repository will be ready in a few hours (it is at revision 13425 now)
> > and it should be a simple 'svn sw
Bo Peng wrote:
> How about we decide, right now, to switch to sf.net? The subversion
> repository will be ready in a few hours (it is at revision 13425 now)
> and it should be a simple 'svn switch' to switch your local copy. The
> webpage will be ready before tomorrow. The
> I don't think this would be a good idea for a stable release.
>
> It is already postponed :-(
How about we decide, right now, to switch to sf.net? The subversion
repository will be ready in a few hours (it is at revision 13425 now)
and it should be a simple 'svn switch&#x
Bo Peng wrote:
> It was just a reminder that, if we eventually decide to migrate to sf,
> and there is no simple way to migrate new revisions, you will have to
> manually re-commit your patches.
I don't think this would be a good idea for a stable release.
> Actually, given the dire situation of
On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 11:47 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller
wrote:
> Bo Peng wrote:
>> It would be easier for the final
>> migration if you guys can refrain from committing small patches for a
>> while. You **might** need to re-commit to the sf repository later.
>
> Well, if it turns out our show stopper
1 - 100 of 160 matches
Mail list logo
