Btw, one of my concerns is that a move away from Svn breaks the process for
people who pull sources from Svn to build their own Pythons. I know a few
teams that do that, and switching to another system isn't just an apt-get
away for them. Do we have enough log info to be able to determine how common
it is that people pull down source kits using Svn?
</F>
On Feb 28, 2009 1:11 AM, <jnoller(a)gmail.com> wrote:
The survey isn't biased. You have a value "the same /worse than the status
quo" - wherein the status quo is subversion. If you hate DVCes, you mark it
as "same/worse than the status quo" and we move on.
No one is suggesting we accept *less* functionality than subversion: in fact
we're looking at these for *more* functionality.
On Feb 27, 2009 7:04pm, Fredrik Lundh <fredrik(a)pythonware.com> wrote: > > No
need for a long answe...
> On Feb 27, 2009 9:24 PM, "Brett Cannon" brett(a)python.org> wrote: > > I had
a long reply all writt...
To see if people actually want to switch off of svn to a DVCS, I have put
together a survey for everyone to state for each DVCS if they think it is
better, worse, or equal to svn (and an option to not say anything if you
have no experience with the DVCS):
http://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?formkey=cDVkUElEeEM5MGdBa29fcFZoU1Y…..
The survey is not anonymous so that I can make sure no one games this; I can
check for duplicate usernames in the answers. But I will not give out any
information beyond aggregate data, so identifiable information stops at me.
I plan to keep this open for a week before I begin to seriously look at the
data.
-Brett
The bias is that the framing of the survey doesn't distinguish between
"better in absolute terms" and "better given that we already have a working
system and that there's a cost for *lots* of people if we switch". I'm
surprised that you can claim that everything's ok even though several people
that appear to be concerned about the latter has stated that they won't
participate in the survey.
</F>
On Feb 28, 2009 1:11 AM, <jnoller(a)gmail.com> wrote:
The survey isn't biased. You have a value "the same /worse than the status
quo" - wherein the status quo is subversion. If you hate DVCes, you mark it
as "same/worse than the status quo" and we move on.
No one is suggesting we accept *less* functionality than subversion: in fact
we're looking at these for *more* functionality.
On Feb 27, 2009 7:04pm, Fredrik Lundh <fredrik(a)pythonware.com> wrote: > > No
need for a long answe...
> On Feb 27, 2009 9:24 PM, "Brett Cannon" brett(a)python.org> wrote: > > I had
a long reply all writt...
No need for a long answer - just explain what the purpose of the survey is,
and why it isn't as biasad as it appears to be. A process where you're
actively discouraging people with a certain opinion from getting involved
isn't much of a process.
</F>
On Feb 27, 2009 9:24 PM, "Brett Cannon" <brett(a)python.org> wrote:
I had a long reply all written out, but instead I decided to discard it so
as to not continue to drag this discussion out. Why? The DVCS PEP is not
even finished yet!
Can you guys please let me finish the PEP before you start worrying about
whether we are going to switch? At least give me the chance to make a
decision on whether I think it is reasonable to switch and what to switch
to. And then we can have a reasonable conversation where I update the PEP to
address any questions that come up.
-Brett
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 02:59, Fredrik Lundh <fredrik(a)pythonware.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 27, ...
I'm not sure if this list or python-dev is appropriate for the more general
dvcs discussions - apologies if I got it wrong. There is one issue I'm yet
to see addressed - Windows line endings.
When the svn tree is checked out on windows, all text files have \r\n line
endings. While many dev tools are capable of working with \n line endings,
this quickly becomes inconvenient - eg, my "patch" tool will always insert
\r\n line endings, simple commnd-line redirections and dumb editors also
will result in mixed or swapped line endings. If we move to a VCS without
this support, it becomes trickier to compare, eg, an old svn tree with a new
tree on windows as every file differs. While commit hooks etc can go some
way to preventing such files from being checked in, it would be much better
to avoid the problem in the first place by using native windows line
endings, as done by svn.
So I guess the first question is: how much importance do we want to put on
that capability?
To the best of my knowledge, bzr's support for this is a few months away. I
keep hearing rumours mercurial does support it and I'm just starting work on
a mercurial based project, so I may be able to find some answers there -
does anyone else have experience with mercurial and windows line endings?
I've never used git but again, heard rumours there is some support.
Thoughts?
Mark
PyPI was working until I suddenly got:
Error...
There's been a problem with your request
: no connection to the server
Anyone with enough rights to check out what problem there might be?
--
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <asmodai(-at-)in-nomine.org> / asmodai
イェルーン ラウフロック ヴァン デル ウェルヴェン
http://www.in-nomine.org/ | http://www.rangaku.org/ | GPG: 2EAC625B
Earth to earth, ashes to ashes, dust to dust...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
...and the release30-maint branch is thawed. Georg, could you please
update the 3.0.1 docs on the website? Thanks!
Barry
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
iQCVAwUBSZYrH3EjvBPtnXfVAQLJpAQAtZr/giibETqY6pFaHKb2WCK70rkV2JpS
lh1pauxxqZfaiDABDvN9SM7SC1uZD0946BMN6XF8s++RqvtGR/K8fIFUSNUjx+AA
sXoifpIoGFPjQ79paRopmTyQMLxAo8dgZgE1t4KeAeRcVQYPb00+O1AQSoEOJpJz
XGVVuKXg6ks=
=UBjP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
But the release30-maint tree is still frozen until the release,
scheduled for about 23 hours from now. Ping me in irc if you find any
brown baggable problems.
Ronald, Martin, do you thing!
Barry
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
iQCUAwUBSZS6HnEjvBPtnXfVAQIBHwP2OaBsqfzp6nB+cQPRZZAAaoIo1OBqyZcI
mxB3vrgjyv/JWX6V2YeljCmLFjMUjNsoiEWeIejuknLoCZLIGyUTTfIVnrrkNDOP
5vAy1I7PGy/pscn10mmJbR6FrLaXM/WjesseA3DpezVsyaW0zmcJ8AYSugFGGbmc
dAgH2x0B4w==
=7JIA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
I am placing a freeze on the release30-maint branch in 15 minutes. At
that point I will sanity check the release and tag it for Martin and
Ronald to build the binaries.
Please check with me on irc before you commit anything to this branch,
until further notice. Please remember that I'm not actually making
the release until tomorrow.
Thanks,
Barry
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
iQCVAwUBSZSm/nEjvBPtnXfVAQLlgAQAt4F18pt3riZX4XfEwWbjQ/5ruOjS0xXq
cQWkzCYwRP+GErZ6rKww7e9D35uj6AQLK/m5B/xvLBtIEMBIhThY70St8F3Hog5r
4orDuZsqNaBW8fiSLcA1FrcJ9QWehlQ2dyerBV+GNRXCQMaEMD1dFAp0zeXyC3tf
2PqXiSyLoNE=
=ricV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Daniel seems to be plowing through issues on the tracker and apparently
Antoine has suggested he be added to the Developer role on the tracker. Any
objections?
-Brett
