Hey Folks, I was just wondering if there main ccrb repo was planning on moving to github. I saw something about this mentioned on the developers list, but i haven''t seen or heard anything since. Personally, I think moving to github would be a hudge benifit to ccrb. I''ve seen alot of people forking and commiting patches for my fork of ccrb, and i''m sure the official repo would receive even more community lovin. If it''s easier for everyone, i''d would be down for moving my fork with git support via grit to a branch off the official github repo. If so, i''ll see if I can get the github guys to delete my fork so that you guys can have the origin. -Ben -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/cruisecontrolrb-users/attachments/20080723/651ff020/attachment.html>
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 9:36 AM, Ben Burkert <ben at benburkert.com> wrote:> If it''s easier for everyone, i''d would be down for moving my fork with git > support via grit to a branch off the official github repo. If so, i''ll see > if I can get the github guys to delete my fork so that you guys can have the > origin.I think Alex is favor of this, but just hasn''t done it yet. As for deleting your fork, you should be able to do that yourself once ccrb moves for real. Just get your branches locally, then delete your whole project off github, then re-fork off the official ccrb and push your branch back up. I''m sure this is possible, but not so sure of what the commands would be. The github gem is handy for some things: http://errtheblog.com/posts/89-huba-huba -- Chad
So right now with github, you can''t delete a branch that''s been forked, unless the forked ones are deleted first. I''d rather not try to coordinate getting 20 or so people each deleting their branch at the same time, that''s why I mentioned getting the github guys to delete it. The point I was trying to make is that i think my fork is important enough and used by enough people to be a branch off origin. I know you guys are working hard on getting ccrb running the git stuff without relying on grit, but as of now, the grit version works most anyone not running windows, which i suspect is most people who use ccrb with git anyways. Until the grit-less ccrb is working with git on all platforms, I think it would be a win-win for everyone if the grit branch was part of the official repository. I don''t have a problem maintianing a seperate fork, and i could honestly care less about getting a commit bit to ccrb, I just feel that making this move would help alot of rails developers move to git, which is better for everyone. -Ben On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 11:45 AM, Chad Woolley <thewoolleyman at gmail.com> wrote:> On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 9:36 AM, Ben Burkert <ben at benburkert.com> wrote: > > If it''s easier for everyone, i''d would be down for moving my fork with > git > > support via grit to a branch off the official github repo. If so, i''ll > see > > if I can get the github guys to delete my fork so that you guys can have > the > > origin. > > I think Alex is favor of this, but just hasn''t done it yet. As for > deleting your fork, you should be able to do that yourself once ccrb > moves for real. Just get your branches locally, then delete your > whole project off github, then re-fork off the official ccrb and push > your branch back up. I''m sure this is possible, but not so sure of > what the commands would be. The github gem is handy for some things: > http://errtheblog.com/posts/89-huba-huba > > -- Chad > _______________________________________________ > Cruisecontrolrb-users mailing list > Cruisecontrolrb-users at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/cruisecontrolrb-users >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/cruisecontrolrb-users/attachments/20080723/b44764bf/attachment.html>
I see your point now. This is really about the Grit support :) I agree. Having tried the git support in the rubyforge origin (is that the right term?) just last weekend, it is obviously not working well, and I opened several tickets against it. I know Alex doesn''t want to have external dependencies, but until someone has the time to fix it right (which isn''t me), the grit alternative should be supported. The only thing I''m not sure of is how much harder it is for you do maintain your branch updated if ccrb still remains on rubyforge for now. A lot harder? A little harder? It seems like, with the nature of git, it should not be a huge deal, but I don''t understand the details of branching and merging enough to know myself. -- Chad On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 10:03 AM, Ben Burkert <ben at benburkert.com> wrote:> The point I was trying to make is that i think my fork is important enough > and used by enough people to be a branch off origin. I know you guys are > working hard on getting ccrb running the git stuff without relying on grit, > but as of now, the grit version works most anyone not running windows, which > i suspect is most people who use ccrb with git anyways. Until the grit-less > ccrb is working with git on all platforms, I think it would be a win-win for > everyone if the grit branch was part of the official repository. I don''t > have a problem maintianing a seperate fork, and i could honestly care less > about getting a commit bit to ccrb, I just feel that making this move would > help alot of rails developers move to git, which is better for everyone.