similar to: GSoC - Syncing docs between GitHub and CentOS's git repo

Hi Kunal! Thanks for your reply! I think the official mirroring is a great method because of higher efficiency. Another thing I am trying to solve is how to retrieve and store all the discussion / issue / PR on GitHub? These functions are great for a doc toolchain. However we shouldn?t rely on GitHub as a part of our project. My plan now is to use bugs.cents.org as a place to discuss about docs

On Apr 7, 2015 9:28 AM, "? ?" <yltt1234512 at gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Kunal! > > Thanks for your reply! I think the official mirroring is a great method because of higher efficiency. > > Another thing I am trying to solve is how to retrieve and store all the discussion / issue / PR on GitHub? These functions are great for a doc toolchain. However we shouldn?t

Hi, Kunaal and I have completed a prototype of the first part of our GSoC project (implement a new doc toolchain). Our goal is to implement a doc toolchain for short how-to docs and lower the barrier for new comers to contribute. This is the workflow of the prototype: 1. Contributor creates a new pull request on GitHub 2. A corresponding issue is automatically created on Pagure 3. Staff and

Hi! I think we may combine these method of discussion. As the project is aimed at short-term contributors and attracting new contributors, we should make the process as easy as possible. I agree with Kunal. Among these three options, I recommend modifying and using an existing open source project best, too. Because for mailing list, it is not so convenient for a short-term contributor to

> ? 2015?6?5????6:10?Karsten Wade <kwade at redhat.com> ??? > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 06/04/2015 12:58 PM, Pete Travis wrote: > >> >> I'm tentatively planning on working pagure[0] into the Fedora Docs >> toolchain. It handles issue tracking, process >> documentation/contribution guidelines, and of course

Hi, The basic toolchain is up and running. I encourage community to test this workflow once. It is an addition to the existing contributing mediums. Site: http://clown-olga-13325.bitballoon.com/ Contributing Docs repo : https://github.com/kunaaljain/test-centos-docs ==AIM== Initial Idea : http://wiki.centos.org/GSoC/2015/Ideas#docs-toolchain The CentOS Project needs more short-form

On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 1:19 AM, Brian (bex) Exelbierd <bex at pobox.com> wrote: > Hi Lei, > > Hi, I am Kunaal the other GSoC student working on this toolchain. > On Jun 20, 2015, at 11:21 AM, Lei Yang <yltt1234512 at gmail.com> wrote: > > > I am sorry it has taken me so long to test this workflow. > Thanks a lot! We need testers and input from community.

So, there's been a bit of a misunderstanding about the hooks that are supported in GitHub, and after talking to the GitHub staff, I'd like to clarify what they are and how we can use them. 1. Pre-commit hooks, avoiding forced pushes / re-order GitHub doesn't support server hooks due to security concerns. But there is an alternative:

Hi, Lei and I have been working on the project, based on community input. We have implemented two way sync between github and pagure as suggest by many. Now we want build the site and display it to user. There are number of options mkdocs, hugo(docker uses it now) etc. There are pros and cons to each site generator. To use hugo, we need the user to have hugo installed too, and than he needs to

On 08/20/2015 02:57 AM, Karsten Wade wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 08/03/2015 12:52 PM, Fabian Arrotin wrote: >> On 03/08/15 18:23, kunaal jain wrote: >> Is that possible to have an overview of the infra and goals (aka >> the architecture) of this GSoC doc project ? that would help >> understanding, as I agree that I'm

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 There have been some questions about how the GSoC project interacts with the existing documentation work that happens around the wiki. Let's get all the open questions in to this thread and discuss them. Lei, Kunaal -- What other open questions do we have? Anyone else with open questions? The GSoC project is supposed to be additive to what we

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 03/08/15 18:23, kunaal jain wrote: > > Would start with the note that the basic project is complete. I > would be releasing the prototype on a separate thread. But for the > discussion sake the workflow will look like this : Authors > contribute content in markdown format, on github. The pull request > created gets mirrored to

Hi, Over the last week, Lei and I have been researching about the review platform where the content submitted can be reviewed, commented, tagged and pushed. This will be an alternative to github pull requests interface, which will thus reduce our dependency on Github in case Github changes its API anytime in future. Even firefox is considering using Github as an alternative medium to receive

Hi, As discussed earlier about the workflow, I and Kunaal will need a server space to host Bugzilla, a test repository at Github + a git repository at git.centos.org <http://git.centos.org/>. This is temporary, required for development and testing. Please let us know how do we obtain the same? We need it to get started on our project. Thanks! Regards, Lei -------------- next part

What would be the status of these buildbots? Is it for your private usage? Otherwise having “project' bots” using a non-official mirror may sound like a strange situation to me. — Mehdi > On Apr 19, 2017, at 5:04 PM, Eric Fiselier via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Adding cfe-dev list... > > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 5:50 PM, Eric Fiselier <eric at

On Jun 4, 2015 12:17 PM, "Karsten Wade" <kwade at redhat.com> wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 06/01/2015 10:30 PM, Lei Yang wrote: > > Hi, > > > > As discussed earlier about the workflow, I and Kunaal will need a > > server space to host Bugzilla, a test repository at Github + a git > > repository at

> On Apr 20, 2017, at 12:39 AM, Eric Fiselier <eric at efcs.ca> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 11:19 PM, Mehdi Amini <mehdi.amini at apple.com <mailto:mehdi.amini at apple.com>> wrote: > What would be the status of these buildbots? Is it for your private usage? > > I intend for them to be public Windows buildbots for libc++. I’m not sure

Hi Lei, > On Jun 20, 2015, at 11:21 AM, Lei Yang <yltt1234512 at gmail.com> wrote: I am sorry it has taken me so long to test this workflow. > Hi, > > Kunaal and I have completed a prototype of the first part of our GSoC project (implement a new doc toolchain). Our goal is to implement a doc toolchain for short how-to docs and lower the barrier for new comers to contribute.

Hi Will, I would like to request collaborator permissions for the Libc++ github mirror. I plan to use the access to setup Appveyor buildbots for libc++. In order to do this I need to be listed as a collaborator on Github. The alternative to Github access would be setting up the correct webhooks for llvm.org/git/libcxx.git, but this seems harder to both do and maintain. /Eric --------------

Time stamps are correct and my system time is correct. I am now tried to use Sys.setFileTime() to update time stamps as proposed. This does not help. The windows and debian builds give different reports on the time stamp issue. https://win-builder.r-project.org/incoming_pretest/eurostat_3.2.8_20180920_122655/Windows/00check.log