On Wed, Dec 24, 2014 at 4:40 AM, Boudewijn Rempt wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Dec 2014, Ben Cooksley wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> As the other thread has gotten a bit congested with various threads, I
>> thought I would split up the topics to make things a bit easier to
>> manage.
>>
>> The first seems the le
On Wed, Dec 24, 2014 at 5:35 AM, Sebastian Kügler wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 23, 2014 06:27:01 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
>> El Dimarts, 23 de desembre de 2014, a les 14:48:21, Sebastian Kügler va
>>
>> escriure:
>> > On Wednesday, December 24, 2014 00:04:22 Ben Cooksley wrote:
>> > > The first s
On Wed, Dec 24, 2014 at 7:10 AM, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> On Tuesday 23 December 2014 17:45:23 Milian Wolff wrote:
>> +1 to all of the above. What about tags btw? In KDevelop e.g. it would only
>> be a nuisance if someone would delete one of our "stable" branches, but
>> deleting one of the relea
On Tuesday 23 December 2014 17:45:23 Milian Wolff wrote:
> +1 to all of the above. What about tags btw? In KDevelop e.g. it would only
> be a nuisance if someone would delete one of our "stable" branches, but
> deleting one of the release tags would be ugly as I'd then need to figure
> out what co
On Tuesday, December 23, 2014 17:29:05 Ivan Čukić wrote:
> > I'd add Applications/* and Plasma/* to this.
> >
> >Would it be possible to add the Calligra/* release branches to that
>
> Seems that release branches are starting with capital letters. Would that
> be possible and sufficient for the d
On Wednesday 24 December 2014 00:04:22 Ben Cooksley wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> As the other thread has gotten a bit congested with various threads, I
> thought I would split up the topics to make things a bit easier to
> manage.
>
> The first seems the least contentious: allowing all developers to
> de
On Tuesday, December 23, 2014 06:27:01 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> El Dimarts, 23 de desembre de 2014, a les 14:48:21, Sebastian Kügler va
>
> escriure:
> > On Wednesday, December 24, 2014 00:04:22 Ben Cooksley wrote:
> > > The first seems the least contentious: allowing all developers to
> > > de
> I want:
> * A dashboard to see the patches/Merge requests/whatever against the
> projects i care
> * A dashboard to see the patches/Merge requests/whatever against all
> projects * Upload patches via git diff + web
+ Web APIs for the above. I always wanted to have an applet that shows my
rev
> I'd add Applications/* and Plasma/* to this.
>Would it be possible to add the Calligra/* release branches to that
Seems that release branches are starting with capital letters. Would that be
possible and sufficient for the deletable-branch heuristic?
--
Cheerio,
Ivan
KDE, ivan.cukic at k
On Wed, 24 Dec 2014, Ben Cooksley wrote:
Hi all,
As the other thread has gotten a bit congested with various threads, I
thought I would split up the topics to make things a bit easier to
manage.
The first seems the least contentious: allowing all developers to
delete branches on our mainline r
Two things I like from recent grrit experience:
---
1. you can essentially use git to push the review (just as if you'd push to
master, just a different branch)
2. The maintainer can just pick the patch, no actual need for the "ShipIt!
-> Push" roundtrip which lead to dormant
El Dimecres, 24 de desembre de 2014, a les 00:20:18, Ben Cooksley va escriure:
> Hi all,
>
> As has been made evident in the prior thread there are quite a few
> interesting ideas floating around about what our Git infrastructure
> should be capable of.
>
> Our current one was constructed when KD
El Dimarts, 23 de desembre de 2014, a les 14:48:21, Sebastian Kügler va
escriure:
> On Wednesday, December 24, 2014 00:04:22 Ben Cooksley wrote:
> > The first seems the least contentious: allowing all developers to
> > delete branches on our mainline repositories, except for certain
> > protected
El Dimecres, 24 de desembre de 2014, a les 00:04:22, Ben Cooksley va escriure:
> Hi all,
>
> As the other thread has gotten a bit congested with various threads, I
> thought I would split up the topics to make things a bit easier to
> manage.
>
> The first seems the least contentious: allowing al
Sebastian Kügler ha scritto:
> On Friday, December 19, 2014 18:46:11 Luigi Toscano wrote:
>>> kscreen and libkscreen maintained by Dan Vrátil. libkscreen is already
>>> released with Plasma but isn't in kde/workspace.
>>>
>>> https://projects.kde.org/projects/extragear/libs/libkscreen
>>> https:
On Wednesday 24 December 2014 00:20:18 Ben Cooksley wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> As has been made evident in the prior thread there are quite a few
> interesting ideas floating around about what our Git infrastructure
> should be capable of.
>
> Our current one was constructed when KDE first seriously mi
On Friday, December 19, 2014 18:46:11 Luigi Toscano wrote:
> > kscreen and libkscreen maintained by Dan Vrátil. libkscreen is already
> > released with Plasma but isn't in kde/workspace.
> >
> > https://projects.kde.org/projects/extragear/libs/libkscreen
> > https://projects.kde.org/projects/ext
On Wednesday, December 24, 2014 00:04:22 Ben Cooksley wrote:
> The first seems the least contentious: allowing all developers to
> delete branches on our mainline repositories, except for certain
> protected branches (like "master" and "KDE/*" for instance).
I'd add "frameworks" to that, it has a
On Friday, December 19, 2014 23:26:15 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> El Dijous, 18 de desembre de 2014, a les 14:52:12, Sebastian Kügler va
> > On Wednesday, December 17, 2014 08:47:09 Jeff Mitchell wrote:
> > > I understood that to be the case -- I'm really meaning for a general,
> > > KDE-wide solut
On Wednesday 24 December 2014 00:04:22 Ben Cooksley wrote:
> The first seems the least contentious: allowing all developers to
> delete branches on our mainline repositories, except for certain
> protected branches (like "master" and "KDE/*" for instance).
>
> Any suggestions or variations on this
Daniel Vrátil ha scritto:
> On Friday, December 19, 2014 06:46:11 PM Luigi Toscano wrote:
>> Jonathan Riddell ha scritto:
>>> Plasma 5.2 is due out next month and there's a few KDE projects which
>>> would be good to be included. Please review these for inclusion in
>>> kde/workspace..
>>>
>>
>>>
Hi all,
KPackage has been moved into frameworks, so will be released on the next
frameworks iteration. (also should be added to the various CI and reviewboard)
thanks everybody for the help in making it happening ;)
plasma-framework will need it to correctly build (see
https://gerrit.vesnicky.
On Tuesday, 23 December 2014 12:04:22 CEST, Ben Cooksley wrote:
The first seems the least contentious: allowing all developers to
delete branches on our mainline repositories, except for certain
protected branches (like "master" and "KDE/*" for instance).
Any suggestions or variations on this?
On Wednesday 24 December 2014 00:20:18 Ben Cooksley wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> As has been made evident in the prior thread there are quite a few
> interesting ideas floating around about what our Git infrastructure
> should be capable of.
>
> Our current one was constructed when KDE first seriously mi
On Friday, December 19, 2014 06:46:11 PM Luigi Toscano wrote:
> Jonathan Riddell ha scritto:
> > Plasma 5.2 is due out next month and there's a few KDE projects which
> > would be good to be included. Please review these for inclusion in
> > kde/workspace..
> >
>
> > kscreen and libkscreen maint
Hi everyone,
I've now split the discussion from this thread into two portions.
If people could please reply to the relevant threads that would be
much appreciated.
If there are aspects of this thread which i've missed in my mails,
please let me know.
Thanks,
Ben
Hi all,
As has been made evident in the prior thread there are quite a few
interesting ideas floating around about what our Git infrastructure
should be capable of.
Our current one was constructed when KDE first seriously migrated to
Git following the Gitorious experiments, and it shows. (As a sy
Hi all,
As the other thread has gotten a bit congested with various threads, I
thought I would split up the topics to make things a bit easier to
manage.
The first seems the least contentious: allowing all developers to
delete branches on our mainline repositories, except for certain
protected br
On 23/12/2014, at 8:24 PM, Ben Cooksley wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 10:19 PM, Ian Wadham wrote:
>> Hello Jan,
>>
>> On 22/12/2014, at 12:01 AM, Jan Kundrát wrote:
>>> On Friday, 19 December 2014 22:16:36 CEST, Scarlett Clark wrote:
Jenkins is compatible and works with Gerrit, so I don
On Mon, Dec 22, 2014 at 4:01 PM, David Edmundson
wrote:
> No objections from me
ok, opened a sysadmin ticket for the move
--
Marco Martin
On Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 10:19 PM, Ian Wadham wrote:
> Hello Jan,
>
> On 22/12/2014, at 12:01 AM, Jan Kundrát wrote:
>> On Friday, 19 December 2014 22:16:36 CEST, Scarlett Clark wrote:
>>> Jenkins is compatible and works with Gerrit, so I don't understand why
>>> another CI is being considered.
>>
Hello Jan,
On 22/12/2014, at 12:01 AM, Jan Kundrát wrote:
> On Friday, 19 December 2014 22:16:36 CEST, Scarlett Clark wrote:
>> Jenkins is compatible and works with Gerrit, so I don't understand why
>> another CI is being considered.
>
> Because when I started this effort this spring, build.kde.
32 matches
Mail list logo
