Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> Thomas Weidenmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> As long as the CVS servers will be still available, or alternatively a
>> windows port of git is available that doesn't require thousands of other
>> tools...
>
> I'm certainly not going to maintain a CVS mirror of t
Thomas Weidenmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> As long as the CVS servers will be still available, or alternatively a
> windows port of git is available that doesn't require thousands of other
> tools...
I'm certainly not going to maintain a CVS mirror of the bugzilla git,
it's not worth the
As long as the CVS servers will be still available, or alternatively a
windows port of git is available that doesn't require thousands of other
tools...
- Thomas
Jan Zerebecki wrote:
> I hereby announce that with the upgrade of Bugzilla we will use
> Git for what the "bugzilla" cvs module is curr
On Wed, Jun 27, 2007 at 10:47:02AM +0200, Kai Blin wrote:
> On Wednesday 27 June 2007 05:16:02 Jan Zerebecki wrote:
>
> > Btw. the idea is to upgrade the server to "Sarge" shortly before
> > the Bugzilla upgrade.
>
> Don't you rather mean "Etch"? Debian stables get old enough as is, no need to
>
On Wednesday 27 June 2007 05:16:02 Jan Zerebecki wrote:
> Btw. the idea is to upgrade the server to "Sarge" shortly before
> the Bugzilla upgrade.
Don't you rather mean "Etch"? Debian stables get old enough as is, no need to
use an outdated version.
Cheers,
Kai
--
Kai Blin
WorldForge develope
I hereby announce that with the upgrade of Bugzilla we will use
Git for what the "bugzilla" cvs module is currently used (if
nothing unforeseen prevents this).
This can be seen as a test for also moving our other remaining
CVS modules.
Anyone who has a problem with this should speak up now.
Btw
