Long story short. I agree switching the read only got repository off if we at the same time switch to git.
In other cases I would like to check first if I can switch my github OpenOffice repo to the svn first. I use my repo ( or more plan to) share my development code between all my machines. Hopefully I can do this on the weekend. At a minimum we should maintain the read only repo more actively. Since use it, I would volunteer as a maintainer if we decide to keep it. Am 7. November 2017 21:55:24 MEZ schrieb Andrea Pescetti <[email protected]>: >Marcus wrote: >> Am 07.11.2017 um 09:57 schrieb Peter Kovacs: >>> I am a bit confused about the 2 pull request. They both seem to try >to >>> merge changes via git into the Git Repo. > >So this would be https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pulls - both of >them are not useful. One is badly written, the other one seems to be a >merge from the AOO34 branch to trunk which doesn't make sense. > >Can we disable this feature? My preference would be for killing the >Github broken mirror entirely, but at least let's disable pull >requests. >I'll let this float here for lazy consensus and then be in contact with > >Infra (and ask to disable pull requests) if nobody opposes. > >>> One is a portugese Language change. > >Actually it is a broken attempt into supporting an additional variant >of >Spanish. > >>> The other one is a Merge request for 3.4 > >It's FROM the AOO34 branch, and thus useless. There is no original code > >at all. > >>> We should reject them or something. At least for the Language merge >>> request I have set a comment that, we use pootle. >>> (Hope that the answer is correct.) > >Your answer is not correct. Pootle only applies to existing languages. >The starting point for a new language would be >https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Adding_a_new_language_or_locale (very >outdated, but if you ask the person to contact our l10n mailing list we > >can provide guidance). His attempt at doing it in code is broken, so >the >merge request itself is irrelevant. > >> yes, we should not accept any changes in GIT as it is just another >> format to get the source. But its origin is in SVN. > >Just to be clear, Github and GIT are not the same thing. The issue here > >is not whether we use SVN or GIT for our official repository (this is a > >separate discussion), but whether we support the unofficial mirror on >Github that was requested by nobody, lags behind, advertises fake >releases, publishes incorrect statistics and -as Peter discovered now- >also provides the fake expectation that we can accept pull requests >through it. If Infra really wants to keep it alive, we should put a >disclaimer on it. > >Regards, > Andrea. > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
