similar to: [LLVMdev] Mailing List archive navigation (was Re: svn mirror git?)

> I'd suggest you/others read the previous thread discussing this issue. > It's a bit tricky to link to a whole thread in the llvm-dev mail > archive, but here's one part of it: > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2011-July/041738.html Maybe I should add this to the FAQ? Does this look good?: Why don't you move from svn to git? ==============================

> For example, say github's llvm-mirror was a contributor's fork. The review > process might look like this: > > Contributor: > Please review my patch: > https://github.com/llvm-mirror/llvm/commit/4823be3be1d87632fbd51ce8e51a58ee5e44b115 > > Maintainer: > Adds inline comments with online tool. Then when patch is looking good: > $ git fetch

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:48 AM, David Chisnall <David.Chisnall at cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote: >> > I think svn works better than git as an authoritative upstream >> >> Would you mind expanding on this? What problem specifically is being solved? Linus and Guido both use DVCS's and the authoritative upstream is whatever URL the BDFL says it is. > > Monotonic version

On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 12:01 PM, Greg Fitzgerald <garious at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Michael, > >> As for actually switching to git. I see no benefit to justify the cost >> of switching unless we actually take advantage of git's features. And >> I've yet to see anyone propose this. > > Then I'll be the first. :) I'd suggest you/others read the

On 15 Nov 2012, at 10:40, Greg Fitzgerald wrote: > Do you mean in the same way that clock skew would affect Make? Or just that Ninja doesn't provide that nice "clock skew detected" message that Make does? Or are you looking for a build system that uses file hashes instead of last-modified times? Ninja complains about circular dependencies when you have your clock set to the

Hi Michael, > As for actually switching to git. I see no benefit to justify the cost > of switching unless we actually take advantage of git's features. And > I've yet to see anyone propose this. Then I'll be the first. :) The benefit is that the review process would require no file copies or email attachments, shorter email conversations, no copying code during reviews to

>> clock skew (which is easy to get in a VM) can confuse Ninja in a way >> that doesn't give helpful errors. > >This is a significant issue. I would not want to transition to >cmake+ninja before this is fixed. Do you mean in the same way that clock skew would affect Make? Or just that Ninja doesn't provide that nice "clock skew detected" message that Make

David Chisnall <David.Chisnall at cl.cam.ac.uk> writes: > clock skew (which is easy to get in a VM) can confuse Ninja in a way > that doesn't give helpful errors. This is a significant issue. I would not want to transition to cmake+ninja before this is fixed. -David

Sean Silva <silvas at purdue.edu> writes: >> For example, say github's llvm-mirror was a contributor's fork. The review >> process might look like this: >> >> Contributor: >> Please review my patch: >> https://github.com/llvm-mirror/llvm/commit/4823be3be1d87632fbd51ce8e51a58ee5e44b115 >> >> Maintainer: >> Adds inline

>> Most development is not "some contributor's fork". > > Well, in the git model every developer has a fork. > >> What you suggest works great for the occasional drive-by >> contributors, but most development is not from drive-by's. > > Not sure what you mean by "drive-by" but in git this is really > irrelevant, I think. Sorry for

Greg Fitzgerald <garious at gmail.com> writes: >> I've yet to see anyone propose this. Oh, many people have proposed using git's features. > Then I'll be the first.  :) > > The benefit is that the review process would require no file copies or > email attachments, shorter email conversations, no copying code during > reviews to simulate inline comments,

I am trying to move from MS Windows (of which I am a std user) to Linux and, 10 days ago, I installed Mandrake 9.0, everything is OK except for WEB navigation: even if surely connected, I cannot navigate and the browser answer is always:...host unknown.. Apparently the problem is the firewall (Shorewall) installed by default that rejects all comunication, infact looking in the Firewall settings

Hi, this is probably not strictly a Rails or Ruby question but I hope that someone here can answer it or at least point me in the right direction. 1. When you click on a link to ''B'', within a long page ''A'' (IE. one that is bigger than the browser window so you need to scroll to navigate it) When you return from ''B'' via a link (to

LLVM Community, > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2011-July/041738.html This was extraordinarily valuable in learning to understand the situation - thank you David Blaikie for pointing me to it. A few key snippets: "Because I optimize for the code reviewer, not the patch submitter," Chris Lattner "Forcing transitioning to git makes no sense for a lot of us - for

How does the LLVM server keep the git svn mirror up to date? Are there hooks in the svn server that automatically update the git mirror? If so, are any of these tools public? I ask because I'm looking at setting up some mirrors at work and I may (I stress _may_) have a way to make git mirrors interact somewhat sanely with each other. But I need something that keeps a git mirror in sync

How does the LLVM server keep the git svn mirror up to date? Are there hooks in the svn server that automatically update the git mirror? If so, are any of these tools public? I ask because I'm looking at setting up some mirrors at work and I may (I stress _may_) have a way to make git mirrors interact somewhat sanely with each other. But I need something that keeps a git mirror in sync

Hi David, > How does the LLVM server keep the git svn mirror up to date?  Are there > hooks in the svn server that automatically update the git mirror? Yes >  If so, are any of these tools public? It's just "git svn fetch" -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Faculty of Mathematics and Mechanics, Saint Petersburg State University

On 15 Nov 2012, at 08:31, Greg Fitzgerald wrote: > Has there been discussion about having svn mirror git instead of vice versa? I've been happy with the git+cmake+ninja combo for a while now, but the online docs suggests this configuration is second-class to svn+autotools+make. Is the community transitioning to any particular configuration? I think svn works better than git as an

Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com> writes: > On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 11:52 AM, <dag at cray.com> wrote: > >> Is svn metadata missing from some of the upstream git mirrors? I really >> don't want to git-svn fetch if I can avoid it. > > I use it for clang and llvm. I haven't tried for the others. According to the web page, it should at least work

Hi everyone, I tried to clone the git mirrors and set up git-svn metadata according to these instructions: http://llvm.org/docs/GettingStarted.html#git-mirror Importantly, I did this (replacing <username>, of course): % git svn init https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/llvm/trunk --username=<username> % git config svn-remote.svn.fetch :refs/remotes/origin/master % git svn rebase -l #