Tommaso Cucinotta wrote:
> student, and he applied his changes with a plain-text editor,
> learning-by-example
> the .lyx syntax, and later he asked me "why don't we use for example latex?",
> and
You made my day :D
On 09/03/14 02:55, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> Tommaso Cucinotta wrote:
>> luckily, we're filling up these weird .lyx files contents using that
>
> Believe it or not there are people who are using scripts for batch creation of
> lyx files for automatized reports and using sed for processing stuff inside
Tommaso Cucinotta wrote:
> luckily, we're filling up these weird .lyx files contents using that
Believe it or not there are people who are using scripts for batch creation of
lyx files for automatized reports and using sed for processing stuff inside it.
But sure, one can move to plain latex.
Pav
On 08/03/14 19:44, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> That being said, I *personally* find XML much too verbose and error
> prone compared to Json if you write it with a plain text editor.
luckily, we're filling up these weird .lyx files contents using that
convenient editor, what's its name?, was it
On 08/03/2014 17:20, Richard Heck wrote:
On 03/08/2014 10:31 AM, Liviu Andronic wrote:
On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Liviu Andronic
wrote:
On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 8:54 AM, Abdelrazak Younes
wrote:
On 07/03/2014 03:09, Tommaso Cucinotta wrote:
... instead of XML, as discussed so often ...
On 03/08/2014 10:31 AM, Liviu Andronic wrote:
On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Liviu Andronic wrote:
On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 8:54 AM, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
On 07/03/2014 03:09, Tommaso Cucinotta wrote:
... instead of XML, as discussed so often ...
https://plus.google.com/+LinusTorvald
On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Liviu Andronic wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 8:54 AM, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
>> On 07/03/2014 03:09, Tommaso Cucinotta wrote:
>>>
>>> ... instead of XML, as discussed so often ...
>>>
>>>https://plus.google.com/+LinusTorvalds/posts/X2XVf9Q7MfV
>>
>>
>> Bad
On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 8:54 AM, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> On 07/03/2014 03:09, Tommaso Cucinotta wrote:
>>
>> ... instead of XML, as discussed so often ...
>>
>>https://plus.google.com/+LinusTorvalds/posts/X2XVf9Q7MfV
>
>
> Bad idea for a document, LyX is used to create structured document, n
On 07/03/2014 03:09, Tommaso Cucinotta wrote:
... instead of XML, as discussed so often ...
https://plus.google.com/+LinusTorvalds/posts/X2XVf9Q7MfV
Bad idea for a document, LyX is used to create structured document, not
database, we are not going to create a new directory for each new
in
Guenter Milde wrote:
> > If human readability is the goal we should stay with the current format
> > in the first place ;)
>
> Not really. All the extra lines for inline constructs make it
> considerabely more difficult to read as e.g. LaTeX (and in this regard
> even more difficult to read than X
On 2014-03-07, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> Liviu Andronic wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 3:09 AM, Tommaso Cucinotta wrote:
>> > ... instead of XML, as discussed so often ...
>> >
>> > https://plus.google.com/+LinusTorvalds/posts/X2XVf9Q7MfV
>> >
>> He makes a strong case for GIT, and against XML. Esp
Liviu Andronic wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 3:09 AM, Tommaso Cucinotta wrote:
> > ... instead of XML, as discussed so often ...
> >
> > https://plus.google.com/+LinusTorvalds/posts/X2XVf9Q7MfV
> >
> He makes a strong case for GIT, and against XML. Especially taking
> into account human readab
On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 3:09 AM, Tommaso Cucinotta wrote:
> ... instead of XML, as discussed so often ...
>
> https://plus.google.com/+LinusTorvalds/posts/X2XVf9Q7MfV
>
He makes a strong case for GIT, and against XML. Especially taking
into account human readability of the source file.
Liviu
>
On Mar 6, 2014 8:09 PM, "Tommaso Cucinotta" wrote:
>
> ... instead of XML, as discussed so often ...
>
> https://plus.google.com/+LinusTorvalds/posts/X2XVf9Q7MfV
>
> T.
GSOC 2015?
S.
... instead of XML, as discussed so often ...
https://plus.google.com/+LinusTorvalds/posts/X2XVf9Q7MfV
T.
Am 19.03.2012 19:15, schrieb Richard Heck:
Use 'git format-patch' to create patches.
I.e., so something like:
git format-patch HEAD-2
which will give you two patches, corresponding to your last two commits.
Thanks but I don't know where to enter this command. The Git GUI is in German (cannot
On 03/19/2012 03:46 AM, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Tommaso Cucinotta writes:
| git show HEAD~2..HEAD> cool.patch
| (assuming your committed patches sit on top of everything else, in
| your local branch)
Use 'git format-patch' to create patches.
I.e., so something like:
git format-pa
Tommaso Cucinotta writes:
| Il 19/03/2012 01:02, Uwe Stöhr ha scritto:
>> As suggested I branched the Git master to develop a new feature. Now
>> I think this feature is now ready and I want to show it on the list
>> but how can I do that?
>>
>> I tried to generate a patch from my branch but I on
Il 19/03/2012 01:02, Uwe Stöhr ha scritto:
As suggested I branched the Git master to develop a new feature. Now I
think this feature is now ready and I want to show it on the list but
how can I do that?
I tried to generate a patch from my branch but I only get a success
message and no file is
As suggested I branched the Git master to develop a new feature. Now I think this feature is now
ready and I want to show it on the list but how can I do that?
I tried to generate a patch from my branch but I only get a success message and
no file is generated.
I can also not push it to somewh
Sorry to already break the silence. Am I right that if we were using
git now, there would be no problem with the server going down or
whatever maintenance is going on right now? Because everyone could
still work on their own branches and then everything could be merged
easily.
Or is this
Xu Wang writes:
| On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 5:28 AM, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> To conclude: let's not discuss this for another year or two, pretty
>> please. I'll shut up now.
>>
>> Abdel.
>>
>>
| Sorry to already break t
On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 5:28 AM, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
>
>
> To conclude: let's not discuss this for another year or two, pretty
> please. I'll shut up now.
>
> Abdel.
>
>
Sorry to already break the silence. Am I right that if we were using git
now, there w
past. Plus we have a well maintained git repo in gitorious
_right_ _now_. Richard and Vincent are already using git. So don't
worry, you are not going to take me or anybody by complete surprise.
To conclude: let's not discuss this for another year or two, pretty
please. I'll shut up now.
Abdel.
then issue a pull request?
>>
>> The master repo is in subversion, and I do not think anyone would act
>> upon such a pull request.
>>
>> | Are there any plans to use github in future?
>>
>> There are plans to more to using git.
>
| Why are we still waiting fo
anyone would act
upon such a pull request.
| Are there any plans to use github in future?
There are plans to more to using git.
Why are we still waiting for that move? Now is a perfect time as there
aren't so much devel activity and I think there is a global consensus
for it.
If we shoul
Op 16-2-2012 21:31, Xu Wang schreef:
Hi,
I have read here: http://wiki.lyx.org/Devel/Git
and I see there is lyx here: https://gitorious.org/lyx
can I fork on gitorious and then issue a pull request?
You can better fork from gitorious if you like and send a patch to the
mailing list. In that
>
> | can I fork on gitorious and then issue a pull request?
>
> The master repo is in subversion, and I do not think anyone would act
> upon such a pull request.
>
> >
> | Are there any plans to use github in future?
>
> There are plans to more to using git. If we sho
l request.
>
| Are there any plans to use github in future?
There are plans to more to using git. If we should use one of the repo
hosting services instead of using our own server has not been decided.
--
Lgb
>From what I've read, svn will be replaced with git for LyX development. And
I guess some developers are using git already? I have been reading
http://wiki.lyx.org/Devel/Git
Will git eventually fully replace svn or will we always rely on git-svn? If
fully replace, is there any (rough) est
What has linux kernel development to do with lyx and its possible
usage
of git?
I guess one can say with confidence that the way git was designed is
related to
linux development process.
If you feel that your world is shattered because git commit dost not
also push to the subversion repo
Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
> Also since I find git-svn such a good solution I think there should be
> an official git repo that can be used to base a git clone on, and a
> cookbook on how to setup this repo for git-svn<->svn interaction.
if the intention was not to destroy svn i have no problem wi
Christian Ridderström
writes:
| On Sat, 7 Mar 2009, Christian Ridderström wrote:
>
>> No, not if we migrate to any service. If we migrate to a server
>> which is called www.lyx.org and can place some directories where we
>> want them, migration is straight forward.
>
| Lars, do you know how to se
Christian Ridderström
writes:
| On Sat, 7 Mar 2009, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>
>> | No, not if we migrate to any service. If we migrate to a server
>> which | is called www.lyx.org and can place some directories where
>> we want | them, migration is straight forward.
>>
>> We can make www.lyx.o
Pavel Sanda writes:
| Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
>> | i can continue with the problems for updating from the main tree compared
>> | to svn if you like (these are not to prove git is something worse, but
>> | to discard your claims that git know everything what svn plus something
>> | more
>> | -
Bo Peng writes:
>>> LyX is a totally different story. LyX is a much smaller project. If
>>> two major features are developed separately, there are high
>>> probability of conflict.
>>
>> Did we ever had that situation?
>
| Then what happened to XML and other branches?
You really think that is wh
Bo Peng writes:
>> Rember the claim put forward a couple of posts ago: "IMHO, we do not
>> have enough manpower to use the git model."
>>
>> Which is just FUD.
>
| Linux/core is huge and there are many components and subcomponents.
| Groups of people work on these subcomponents and submit their t
On 07/03/2009 18:57, Pavel Sanda wrote:
Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
| i can continue with the problems for updating from the main tree compared
| to svn if you like (these are not to prove git is something worse, but
| to discard your claims that git know everything what svn plus something
|
> Hmm... I just realized that one thing I'll miss if I don't have full access.
> It's the ability to change ownership and permission of certain files and
> directories. This can sometimes be problematic when doing some stuff with
> the wiki/web. That's sometthing which will make things a little bit
On Sat, 7 Mar 2009, Christian Ridderström wrote:
No, not if we migrate to any service. If we migrate to a server which is
called www.lyx.org and can place some directories where we want them,
migration is straight forward.
Lars, do you know how to set up a vhost on a SF server? I'm thinking i
>> LyX is a totally different story. LyX is a much smaller project. If
>> two major features are developed separately, there are high
>> probability of conflict.
>
> Did we ever had that situation?
Then what happened to XML and other branches? LyX is sufficiently
small so that you can not leave tr
On Sat, Mar 07, 2009 at 11:39:07AM -0600, Bo Peng wrote:
> LyX is a totally different story. LyX is a much smaller project. If
> two major features are developed separately, there are high
> probability of conflict.
Did we ever had that situation?
> Subversion does this perfectly because everyone
On Sat, 7 Mar 2009, Christian Ridderström wrote:
Here's an updated list of services. Should probably put this on a wiki
page eventually. Please add/comment about stuff I've forgotten.
!!! Services related to LyX and LyX development.
* Web site http://www.lyx.org On aussie.
* Wiki
On Sat, 7 Mar 2009, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| No, not if we migrate to any service. If we migrate to a server which
| is called www.lyx.org and can place some directories where we want
| them, migration is straight forward.
We can make www.lyx.org point into the sf.net space and setup a vh
Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
> | i can continue with the problems for updating from the main tree compared
> | to svn if you like (these are not to prove git is something worse, but
> | to discard your claims that git know everything what svn plus something
> | more
> | - two different tools for two
On Thu, 5 Mar 2009, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
main ftp is not on aussie
malinglist (mainly) is not on aussie
dns servers is not on aussie
To start a list of services. I thought I'd e-mailed that earlier, but it
seems lost.
/C
--
Christian Ridderström Mobile: +46-
> Rember the claim put forward a couple of posts ago: "IMHO, we do not
> have enough manpower to use the git model."
>
> Which is just FUD.
Linux/core is huge and there are many components and subcomponents.
Groups of people work on these subcomponents and submit their tested
patches to their com
Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes writes:
>
> | Pavel Sanda writes:
> >
> >> Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> >>> As for refering to a svn revision instead of a git branch, this is a
> >>> different mental model indeed, but not not a loss of function IMHO.
> >>
> >> to me this depends
Pavel Sanda writes:
| Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
>> >> | IMHO, we do not have enough manpower to use the git model.
>> >>
>> >> There is no such thing as the "git model".
>> >
>> | for example i would like to hear how you directly commit to the main
>> | repository - some _one_ command equivalen
Christian Ridderström wrote:
> On Sat, 7 Mar 2009, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>
>>> I do not quite get that... who is it easer to say r1234 instead of
>>> 23ae45?
>>
>> I like the fact that revision numbers form an increasing timeline.
>
> I guess one advantage with r1234 is if you manually bise
Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
> >> | IMHO, we do not have enough manpower to use the git model.
> >>
> >> There is no such thing as the "git model".
> >
> | for example i would like to hear how you directly commit to the main
> | repository - some _one_ command equivalent to svn ci.
>
> why is it ba
Christian Ridderström
writes:
| On Sat, 7 Mar 2009, Bo Peng wrote:
>
>>> It is driven by PmWiki, which can be used on SF. However, I believe
>>> it'll require quite a bit of work to migrate to a different
>>> host(name). It was never designed to be portable like the web pages
>>> (which are also
On Sat, 7 Mar 2009, Bo Peng wrote:
It is driven by PmWiki, which can be used on SF. However, I believe
it'll require quite a bit of work to migrate to a different host(name).
It was never designed to be portable like the web pages (which are also
generated by PmWiki).
This will be case if we
On Sat, 7 Mar 2009, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| On Wed, 4 Mar 2009, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
I belive github might be a good place for the repo and the wiki
(other can judge better than me). And do we really need the regular
web space if the wiki is good?
| What's the'regular web space'
On Thu, 5 Mar 2009, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
I'd love to get rid of bugzilla anyway... it is a superhassle to
upgrade...
Is it practical to stop using bugzilla if we already have many references
to issues in bugzilla, or to changesets or whatever?
I think this was asked elsewhere by someo
On Sat, 7 Mar 2009, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
I do not quite get that... who is it easer to say r1234 instead of
23ae45?
I like the fact that revision numbers form an increasing timeline.
I guess one advantage with r1234 is if you manually bisect between
revisions to see when a bug appe
> It is driven by PmWiki, which can be used on SF. However, I believe it'll
> require quite a bit of work to migrate to a different host(name). It was
> never designed to be portable like the web pages (which are also generated
> by PmWiki).
This will be case if we migrate to ANY service, and auss
Christian Ridderström
writes:
| On Wed, 4 Mar 2009, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>
>> I belive github might be a good place for the repo and the wiki
>> (other can judge better than me). And do we really need the regular
>> web space if the wiki is good?
>
| What's the'regular web space'? Does tha
I changed the subject, felt like it was time :-)
On Wed, 4 Mar 2009, Bo Peng wrote:
sf.net provides ssh access, something even my web hosting company is
unwilling to provide. I just checked and it has doxygen pre-installed.
But the shells are time limited, so I doubt we'd be able to set up a
Pavel Sanda writes:
| Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
>> This is just bull. You are creating a model that is not optimal and
>> saying this is due to git.
>>
>> | IMHO, we do not have enough manpower to use the git model.
>>
>> There is no such thing as the "git model".
>
| for example i would like
On Wed, 4 Mar 2009, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
I belive github might be a good place for the repo and the wiki (other
can judge better than me). And do we really need the regular web space
if the wiki is good?
What's the'regular web space'? Does that mean the web pages?
/C
--
Christian Rid
Lars Gullik Bjønnes a écrit :
| For users that (try to) help us find bugs (and we need these people),
| saying "it did work at r1234" is easier that giving a hash (isn't this
| how a git state is defined? here I show my ignorance about it).
I do not quite get that... who is it easer to say r1234
On Wed, 4 Mar 2009, Lars Gullik Bjonnes wrote:
| using git in the day job a while ago. The bright side is that there
| are lots of helpful people around ;-)
you is the general you, and personally is the, well, person you.
So, you, as in Andre, already got experience with git ,great.
(I would
Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
> This is just bull. You are creating a model that is not optimal and
> saying this is due to git.
>
> | IMHO, we do not have enough manpower to use the git model.
>
> There is no such thing as the "git model".
for example i would like to hear how you directly commit t
only branch
| merging points. The idea is that any feature or bug is developped in a
| separate branch. I believe tag is much more meaningful to the user
| than svn revision number.
>
| IOW, this is a different mental model and nothing is lost from svn, really.
That is only one way of using git...
--
Lgb
Abdelrazak Younes writes:
| Bo Peng wrote:
>>> Not quite true. In a git world, a bug fixing would _always_ happen in a
>>> specific branch and be merged to the main repo when it's done;
>>>
>>
>> This is not that useful if we keep the one developer - one feature
>> developing model. Right no
Bo Peng writes:
>> Not quite true. In a git world, a bug fixing would _always_ happen in a
>> specific branch and be merged to the main repo when it's done;
>
| This is not that useful if we keep the one developer - one feature
| developing model. Right now, when you work on a feature, all others
Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
> git supports it as well
it does, but not as well.
pavel
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes writes:
| Pavel Sanda writes:
>
>> Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
>>> As for refering to a svn revision instead of a git branch, this is a
>>> different mental model indeed, but not not a loss of function IMHO.
>>
>> to me this depends on what kind of development model you use an
Pavel Sanda writes:
| Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
>> As for refering to a svn revision instead of a git branch, this is a
>> different mental model indeed, but not not a loss of function IMHO.
>
| to me this depends on what kind of development model you use and given
| the number of lyx developers
On Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 06:52:41PM +0100, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> Andre Poenitz wrote:
> > the same way as LyX svn trunk is currently treated. You can push your
> > work pretty much in the same chunks as you would today.
>
> but the flamed point was not about _pushing_. rather it was about commit
> i
Andre Poenitz wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 07:29:54AM -0600, Bo Peng wrote:
> > > Not quite true. In a git world, a bug fixing would _always_ happen in a
> > > specific branch and be merged to the main repo when it's done;
> >
> > This is not that useful if we keep the one developer - one feat
On Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 07:29:54AM -0600, Bo Peng wrote:
> > Not quite true. In a git world, a bug fixing would _always_ happen in a
> > specific branch and be merged to the main repo when it's done;
>
> This is not that useful if we keep the one developer - one feature
> developing model. Right n
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes writes:
Anyway, I'll use whatever is decided...
Really? I thought you were an old, lazy and stubborn guy...
Lazy is the operative word. I am not contributing that much, so I cannot
complain. At worst I'll send patches to the lis
Abdelrazak Younes writes:
>> Anyway, I'll use whatever is decided...
>>
> Really? I thought you were an old, lazy and stubborn guy...
Lazy is the operative word. I am not contributing that much, so I cannot
complain. At worst I'll send patches to the list so that others apply
them :)
JMarc
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
>> IMHO, we do not have enough manpower to use the git model.
>>
>
> Well, we are not _forced_ to use only one merging per feature, this can be
> split into logical steps (at the intiative of the developer).
but this split is what makes revision numbers useful. i just
Bo Peng wrote:
Not quite true. In a git world, a bug fixing would _always_ happen in a
specific branch and be merged to the main repo when it's done;
This is not that useful if we keep the one developer - one feature
developing model. Right now, when you work on a feature, all others
are f
> Not quite true. In a git world, a bug fixing would _always_ happen in a
> specific branch and be merged to the main repo when it's done;
This is not that useful if we keep the one developer - one feature
developing model. Right now, when you work on a feature, all others
are forced to check it o
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Pavel Sanda writes:
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
As for refering to a svn revision instead of a git branch, this is a
different mental model indeed, but not not a loss of function IMHO.
to me this depends on what kind of development model you use and gi
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> From what I understand about git, it is lost in the new world.
yes
pavel
Pavel Sanda writes:
> Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
>> As for refering to a svn revision instead of a git branch, this is a
>> different mental model indeed, but not not a loss of function IMHO.
>
> to me this depends on what kind of development model you use and given
> the number of lyx developers
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
>> to me this depends on what kind of development model you use and given
>> the number of lyx developers and the way we proceed i think the
>> centralized
>> way is the better one.
>>
>
> So the LyX devs are a bunch of old, lazy and stubborn guys?
somehow i fail to fo
Pavel Sanda wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
As for refering to a svn revision instead of a git branch, this is a
different mental model indeed, but not not a loss of function IMHO.
to me this depends on what kind of development model you use and given
the number of lyx developers and t
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> As for refering to a svn revision instead of a git branch, this is a
> different mental model indeed, but not not a loss of function IMHO.
to me this depends on what kind of development model you use and given
the number of lyx developers and the way we proceed i think
Pavel Sanda wrote:
Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
Pavel Sanda writes:
| Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Sure if a change is wanted we will go the full 10 yards... but why
unwilling to gain experience by testing with git-svn first?
Oh, I already use an like git. But I am affraid mos
Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
> >> | No, AFAIK you can clone a git repo with 'git clone' and then use
> >> | git-svn for the rest. I use Pavel's LyX repo for history and blaming
> >> | with qgit and that's very very good compared to 'svn log' and 'svn
> >> | blame', even more important, that's fast, i
Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
> Pavel Sanda writes:
>
> | Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> >>> Sure if a change is wanted we will go the full 10 yards... but why
> >>> unwilling to gain experience by testing with git-svn first?
> >>>
> >>
> >> Oh, I already use an like git. But I am affraid most develo
lar...@gullik.org (Lars Gullik Bjønnes) writes:
> | - cannot import bugzilla database to tracker
>
> I'd love to get rid of bugzilla anyway... it is a superhassle to
> upgrade...
I want to get rid of bugzilla too, but I do not want to lose my precious
bugs. I got accustomed to them, you see?
> |
> | and there is a good question why should we migrate after all. while i enjoy
> | git i see drawbacks from such switching too...
>
> Please name them.
subversion is considerably simpler than git if we do not use branches
that often. Having a revision number (I know where to find revision
21007),
Bo Peng writes:
>> | Why do you prefer sf.net to other forges, actually?
>
| Like many other hot issues, I think no consensus will be reached by
| emails, but real actions will prevail. If you like a host site, please
| go ahead and start migration. I do not think it will hurt lyx in any
| way if
Pavel Sanda writes:
| Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
>>> Sure if a change is wanted we will go the full 10 yards... but why
>>> unwilling to gain experience by testing with git-svn first?
>>>
>>
>> Oh, I already use an like git. But I am affraid most developpers won't use
>> it if svn is still avai
Abdelrazak Younes writes:
| Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>> Abdelrazak Younes writes:
>>
>> [...]
>> | No, AFAIK you can clone a git repo with 'git clone' and then use
>> | git-svn for the rest. I use Pavel's LyX repo for history and blaming
>> | with qgit and that's very very good compared to 'sv
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
>> Sure if a change is wanted we will go the full 10 yards... but why
>> unwilling to gain experience by testing with git-svn first?
>>
>
> Oh, I already use an like git. But I am affraid most developpers won't use
> it if svn is still available.
and there is a good qu
> | Why do you prefer sf.net to other forges, actually?
Like many other hot issues, I think no consensus will be reached by
emails, but real actions will prevail. If you like a host site, please
go ahead and start migration. I do not think it will hurt lyx in any
way if we register lyx on a few we
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes writes:
[...]
| No, AFAIK you can clone a git repo with 'git clone' and then use
| git-svn for the rest. I use Pavel's LyX repo for history and blaming
| with qgit and that's very very good compared to 'svn log' and 'svn
| blame', even more important
Abdelrazak Younes writes:
[...]
| No, AFAIK you can clone a git repo with 'git clone' and then use
| git-svn for the rest. I use Pavel's LyX repo for history and blaming
| with qgit and that's very very good compared to 'svn log' and 'svn
| blame', even more important, that's fast, incredibly fas
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes writes:
| lar...@gullik.org (Lars Gullik Bjønnes) writes:
>> What do you mean by "get all our data back"? I do not quite understand
>> how that can be a problem
>
| Have access to our raw svn/git data to host it else where (but this is
| probably moot with git). Have access t
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Pavel Sanda writes:
| Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
If there are interest I'll try to setup a git tree that you can clone and set
up as a git-svn tree. (I'll even write up a wiki page to explain briefly how
to do that.)
| this is already done on git.or.c
On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 10:56:06AM +, Guenter Milde wrote:
Hi,
> My favourite is berlios.de, an advertisement-free, clean open-source
> forge with bug-tracking, GIT and other tools (see
> http://developer.berlios.de/docman/display_doc.php?docid=26&group_id=2
> for details).
AFAIK Joerg Schil
On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 10:10:53AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes writes:
Hi,
> In this respect, I'd favor hosting from free software projects like
> alioth (debian), launchpad (ubuntu,although this is a company) or
> savannah (GNU).
Alioth is strictly Debian only so
1 - 100 of 150 matches
Mail list logo
