Re: MIRA, BALL, or svn vs git
On 03/09/2011 04:28 PM, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 09, 2011 at 11:46:35PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
>
>> for the prospective packages, I think that the best is to document them as
>> early as possible in the tasks files,
>>
> Yes!
>
> Currently mira is mentioned on the tasks pages tp be in SVN and there
> are files in SVN. Could you please fix the bio-ngs task file and drop
> an according file in SVN that the place has changed?
>
Well, we need to cross-check with Bio-Linux, still. But I have
some confidence that the current SVN version is as good as the
one in git. The two efforts now need to be merged.
>> and to make
>> debian-med-packaging@lists.alioth.debian.org the owner of their ITP bug, where
>> the VCS should be indicated.
>>
> While I try to follow ITP bugs very carefully it might happen that I
> miss some change. So editing the task file after issuing an ITP or
> pinging me would be quite welcome. I'm also watching SVN commits for
> new packaging stuff droping in. I will miss those packages in Git which
> are not setup to report to the commit list. This should be done in any
> case!
>
I am notoriously bad at ITPs, I must admit. Google has become
pretty good at spotting them with "<packagename> debian"
but otherwise I will not find them. To have those linked from
our Debian Med tasks page would certainly help.
>> I do not know how other teams organise themselves. I think that in the case
>> of pkg-perl, their Package Entropy Tracker is not yet Git-aware. Another
>> idea for the Google Summer of Code ?
>>
> As far as I know pkg-perl uses SVN explicitely.
They have opened up towards git now.
> I try to talk to them
> (again) at DebConf about using UDD for their Entropy tracker which would
> provide a unique interface for several things.
>
Well, I personally would hope for a true low-tech solution.
Many greetings
Steffen
Reply to: