COmanage Developers List

[Benn Oshrin <>]

We can discuss next week.

Short version: we're not switching before 0.3/0.4 are done.

On 11/29/11 1:21 PM, Scott Koranda wrote:
> > I support switching to git.  How hard would it be to move everything over?
>
> I think it depends on where/how it is hosted.
>
> If I2 wants or needs to host it then Benn would have to ask
> the infrastructure people to set it up.
>
> Or we could just look at something like github.
>
> Can you ask Benn about it when you see him this week?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Scott
>
> > Marie
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 4:53 AM, Scott 
> > Koranda<>
> >   wrote:
> > > > I'm trying to split the code into separate commits and want to do
> > > > something like "git add -p".  Do you know of an easy way to do this in
> > > > SVN?
> > >
> > > I do not know of an easy way to do this.
> > >
> > > Two ideas:
> > >
> > > 1) We could start to use branches, either for features/issues
> > > or even per-developer. You could have a "Marie" branch and
> > > then cherrypick from it to merge into trunk (or other
> > > brances).
> > >
> > > http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.7/svn.branchmerge.advanced.html#svn.branchmerge.cherrypicking
> > >
> > > 2) We could switch to git.
> > >
> > > I use git for most of my other work. It rocks. Using SVN now
> > > is tedious and frustrating.
> > >
> > > Scott
> > >
> > > > On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 5:49 PM, Benn 
> > > > Oshrin<>
> > > >   wrote:
> > > > > I've updated JIRA to reflect this. I've committed my outstanding issues, and
> > > > > am going to start coming up to speed on Cake 2. We can coordinate Marie's
> > > > > pending commits with tagging 0.4 and then the Cake 2 upgrade (ie: 0.5)
> > > > > during our f2f.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 11/23/11 3:30 PM, Benn Oshrin wrote:
> > > > > > A quick read through of open issues suggests the following actions
> > > > > > before we can tag 0.3...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Issues for Benn to commit: CO-198, CO-199
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Issues for Marie to commit: CO-87, CO-89, CO-94, CO-150, CO-155 (may not
> > > > > > be an issue anymore?)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Issues to move to 0.5, but that Scott should continue working on
> > > > > > requirements for: CO-81, CO-179, CO-186, CO-188
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Issues to move to 0.5 (or later): CO-88, CO-91 (this should definitely
> > > > > > wait until Cake 2), CO-170
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Placeholder" issues that won't block tagging 0.3 (parent tickets, demo
> > > > > > server stuff, etc): CO-41, CO-167, CO-168, CO-169, CO-177
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Chime in if you disagree with any of the above. Scott, you should also
> > > > > > confirm this assessment that you don't have any blockers for 0.3, or
> > > > > > identify which one(s) you've been working on that you'd like to commit
> > > > > > changes for before 0.4.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I realize we're punting some significant stuff into 0.5/0.6, but I'd
> > > > > > like to get the code stabilized so we can do the CakePHP 2.0 upgrade
> > > > > > sooner rather than later.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -Benn-