You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@wicket.apache.org by Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com> on 2010/12/29 18:30:22 UTC
Wicketstuff@github: re-organize now or later?
Currently our wicketstuff repo at github is one gigantic repo
containing everything. I'd like to propose to split the repository
into two:
- github.com/wicketstuff/wicketstuff (containing just the core project)
- github.com/wicketstuff/archive (containing all the
side projects)
The idea is that wicketstuff core is already a huge project, and I'd
like to make the footprint contain just that, without the legacy
projects that surround the core.
I'd like to do this before folks start cloning away, so before we
announce the availability. But if anyone wants to wait that's fine
with me as well...
Anyone got ideas or a different opinion?
Martijn
--
Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
Re: Wicketstuff@github: re-organize now or later?
Posted by Michael O'Cleirigh <mi...@rivulet.ca>.
There are a 11 commits that were done since 1.4.14.
They are contained in the test import (first one) which I have checked
out here.
I will try to cherry-pick them back and commit them into the core-1.4.x
branch.
I'll update the list when it is done.
Mike
> i was able to restore it off the 1.4.14 release tag. hopefully there
> havent been commits in the interim.
>
> -igor
>
> 2010/12/29 Major Péter<ma...@sch.bme.hu>:
>> I think the wicketstuff-core-1.4 branch got lost, the core project now only
>> has the 1.5-SNAPSHOT stuff, at least that branch should be restored IMHO.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Peter
>>
>> 2010-12-29 22:50 keltezéssel, Igor Vaynberg írta:
>>> i think i got them split. core is already pushed, sandbox is incoming.
>>>
>>> we lost branches in the process, i dont think this is a big deal since
>>> they were mostly used as tags to mark releases. on the other hand i
>>> converted release branches to tags before i did the split, and those
>>> seemed to stick around - so maybe we havent lost anything at all.
>>>
>>> -igor
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 1:43 PM, Martijn Dashorst
>>> <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Great, I won't be of much help as I left my laptop at work due to a
>>>> mishap with my car (apparent broken battery) and needing to entertain
>>>> the AAA guy.
>>>>
>>>> Martijn
>>>>
>>>> On Wednesday, December 29, 2010, Igor Vaynberg<ig...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> i will play around with splitting and we can see what happens
>>>>>
>>>>> -igor
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 10:04 AM, James Carman
>>>>> <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:
>>>>>> +1
>>>>>> On Dec 29, 2010 12:49 PM, "Igor Vaynberg"<ig...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> i think core and sandbox are probably better names and more clearly
>>>>>>> communicate the intent.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -igor
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 9:30 AM, Martijn Dashorst
>>>>>>> <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Currently our wicketstuff repo at github is one gigantic repo
>>>>>>>> containing everything. I'd like to propose to split the repository
>>>>>>>> into two:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - github.com/wicketstuff/wicketstuff (containing just the
>>>>>>>> core
>>>>>> project)
>>>>>>>> - github.com/wicketstuff/archive (containing all the
>>>>>>>> side projects)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The idea is that wicketstuff core is already a huge project, and I'd
>>>>>>>> like to make the footprint contain just that, without the legacy
>>>>>>>> projects that surround the core.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'd like to do this before folks start cloning away, so before we
>>>>>>>> announce the availability. But if anyone wants to wait that's fine
>>>>>>>> with me as well...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Anyone got ideas or a different opinion?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Martijn
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best:
>>>>>>>> http://wicketinaction.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
Re: Wicketstuff@github: re-organize now or later?
Posted by Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com>.
mike, do you want to craft an announcement to user@ and explain the
new structure, etc. that way people will know we are good to go.
active committers can also start requesting push access. i have
created a "committers" team in our github org for them.
-igor
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 12:55 PM, Michael O'Cleirigh
<mi...@rivulet.ca> wrote:
> Hi Igor,
>
> Yes, I think everything is good to go now
>
> Mike
>
>> so are we good to go now import-wise?
>>
>> -igor
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 7:13 PM, Michael O'Cleirigh
>> <mi...@rivulet.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>> I was able to add in a remote to the wicketstuff-core-1.4 branch from the
>>> first import and then use git cherry-pick to pull in each of the 11
>>> commits
>>> that had occurred since the 1.4.14 release tag was applied.
>>>
>>> I've pushed my changes into the wicketstuff/core repository. This should
>>> build the 1.4.15-SNAPSHOT version.
>>>
>>> Once we have everything finalized and announced I will cut the 1.4.15
>>> release and update the core-1.4.x branch to track 1.4.16-SNAPSHOT
>>>
>>> Since about 1.4.10 I have been creating branches for each stable
>>> wicketstuff-core release for the 1.4.stable.x point releases. Those
>>> weren't
>>> preserved as branches but I think the tags will be sufficient.
>>>
>>> I might try a new approach that follows how git is showing the historical
>>> releases in that each release will get a tag and for the stable branch
>>> that
>>> tracks the non snapshot wicket release it would move forward from release
>>> to
>>> release.
>>>
>>> Actually the build just failed with push-timer complaining about java6
>>> ism's.
>>>
>>> Mike
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> i was able to restore it off the 1.4.14 release tag. hopefully there
>>>> havent been commits in the interim.
>>>>
>>>> -igor
>>>>
>>>> 2010/12/29 Major Péter<ma...@sch.bme.hu>:
>>>>>
>>>>> I think the wicketstuff-core-1.4 branch got lost, the core project now
>>>>> only
>>>>> has the 1.5-SNAPSHOT stuff, at least that branch should be restored
>>>>> IMHO.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Peter
>>>>>
>>>>> 2010-12-29 22:50 keltezéssel, Igor Vaynberg írta:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> i think i got them split. core is already pushed, sandbox is incoming.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> we lost branches in the process, i dont think this is a big deal since
>>>>>> they were mostly used as tags to mark releases. on the other hand i
>>>>>> converted release branches to tags before i did the split, and those
>>>>>> seemed to stick around - so maybe we havent lost anything at all.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -igor
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 1:43 PM, Martijn Dashorst
>>>>>> <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Great, I won't be of much help as I left my laptop at work due to a
>>>>>>> mishap with my car (apparent broken battery) and needing to entertain
>>>>>>> the AAA guy.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Martijn
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wednesday, December 29, 2010, Igor
>>>>>>> Vaynberg<ig...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> i will play around with splitting and we can see what happens
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -igor
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 10:04 AM, James Carman
>>>>>>>> <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>>> On Dec 29, 2010 12:49 PM, "Igor Vaynberg"<ig...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> i think core and sandbox are probably better names and more
>>>>>>>>>> clearly
>>>>>>>>>> communicate the intent.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -igor
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 9:30 AM, Martijn Dashorst
>>>>>>>>>> <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Currently our wicketstuff repo at github is one gigantic repo
>>>>>>>>>>> containing everything. I'd like to propose to split the
>>>>>>>>>>> repository
>>>>>>>>>>> into two:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> - github.com/wicketstuff/wicketstuff (containing just
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> core
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> project)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> - github.com/wicketstuff/archive (containing all
>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> side projects)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The idea is that wicketstuff core is already a huge project, and
>>>>>>>>>>> I'd
>>>>>>>>>>> like to make the footprint contain just that, without the legacy
>>>>>>>>>>> projects that surround the core.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to do this before folks start cloning away, so before we
>>>>>>>>>>> announce the availability. But if anyone wants to wait that's
>>>>>>>>>>> fine
>>>>>>>>>>> with me as well...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Anyone got ideas or a different opinion?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Martijn
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best:
>>>>>>>>>>> http://wicketinaction.com
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best:
>>>>>>> http://wicketinaction.com
>>>
>
>
Re: Wicketstuff@github: re-organize now or later?
Posted by Michael O'Cleirigh <mi...@rivulet.ca>.
Hi Igor,
Yes, I think everything is good to go now
Mike
> so are we good to go now import-wise?
>
> -igor
>
> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 7:13 PM, Michael O'Cleirigh
> <mi...@rivulet.ca> wrote:
>> I was able to add in a remote to the wicketstuff-core-1.4 branch from the
>> first import and then use git cherry-pick to pull in each of the 11 commits
>> that had occurred since the 1.4.14 release tag was applied.
>>
>> I've pushed my changes into the wicketstuff/core repository. This should
>> build the 1.4.15-SNAPSHOT version.
>>
>> Once we have everything finalized and announced I will cut the 1.4.15
>> release and update the core-1.4.x branch to track 1.4.16-SNAPSHOT
>>
>> Since about 1.4.10 I have been creating branches for each stable
>> wicketstuff-core release for the 1.4.stable.x point releases. Those weren't
>> preserved as branches but I think the tags will be sufficient.
>>
>> I might try a new approach that follows how git is showing the historical
>> releases in that each release will get a tag and for the stable branch that
>> tracks the non snapshot wicket release it would move forward from release to
>> release.
>>
>> Actually the build just failed with push-timer complaining about java6
>> ism's.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>
>>
>>> i was able to restore it off the 1.4.14 release tag. hopefully there
>>> havent been commits in the interim.
>>>
>>> -igor
>>>
>>> 2010/12/29 Major Péter<ma...@sch.bme.hu>:
>>>> I think the wicketstuff-core-1.4 branch got lost, the core project now
>>>> only
>>>> has the 1.5-SNAPSHOT stuff, at least that branch should be restored IMHO.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Peter
>>>>
>>>> 2010-12-29 22:50 keltezéssel, Igor Vaynberg írta:
>>>>> i think i got them split. core is already pushed, sandbox is incoming.
>>>>>
>>>>> we lost branches in the process, i dont think this is a big deal since
>>>>> they were mostly used as tags to mark releases. on the other hand i
>>>>> converted release branches to tags before i did the split, and those
>>>>> seemed to stick around - so maybe we havent lost anything at all.
>>>>>
>>>>> -igor
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 1:43 PM, Martijn Dashorst
>>>>> <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Great, I won't be of much help as I left my laptop at work due to a
>>>>>> mishap with my car (apparent broken battery) and needing to entertain
>>>>>> the AAA guy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Martijn
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wednesday, December 29, 2010, Igor Vaynberg<ig...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> i will play around with splitting and we can see what happens
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -igor
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 10:04 AM, James Carman
>>>>>>> <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>>> On Dec 29, 2010 12:49 PM, "Igor Vaynberg"<ig...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> i think core and sandbox are probably better names and more clearly
>>>>>>>>> communicate the intent.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -igor
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 9:30 AM, Martijn Dashorst
>>>>>>>>> <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Currently our wicketstuff repo at github is one gigantic repo
>>>>>>>>>> containing everything. I'd like to propose to split the repository
>>>>>>>>>> into two:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> - github.com/wicketstuff/wicketstuff (containing just the
>>>>>>>>>> core
>>>>>>>> project)
>>>>>>>>>> - github.com/wicketstuff/archive (containing all the
>>>>>>>>>> side projects)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The idea is that wicketstuff core is already a huge project, and
>>>>>>>>>> I'd
>>>>>>>>>> like to make the footprint contain just that, without the legacy
>>>>>>>>>> projects that surround the core.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to do this before folks start cloning away, so before we
>>>>>>>>>> announce the availability. But if anyone wants to wait that's fine
>>>>>>>>>> with me as well...
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Anyone got ideas or a different opinion?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Martijn
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best:
>>>>>>>>>> http://wicketinaction.com
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
>>
Re: Wicketstuff@github: re-organize now or later?
Posted by Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com>.
so are we good to go now import-wise?
-igor
On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 7:13 PM, Michael O'Cleirigh
<mi...@rivulet.ca> wrote:
> I was able to add in a remote to the wicketstuff-core-1.4 branch from the
> first import and then use git cherry-pick to pull in each of the 11 commits
> that had occurred since the 1.4.14 release tag was applied.
>
> I've pushed my changes into the wicketstuff/core repository. This should
> build the 1.4.15-SNAPSHOT version.
>
> Once we have everything finalized and announced I will cut the 1.4.15
> release and update the core-1.4.x branch to track 1.4.16-SNAPSHOT
>
> Since about 1.4.10 I have been creating branches for each stable
> wicketstuff-core release for the 1.4.stable.x point releases. Those weren't
> preserved as branches but I think the tags will be sufficient.
>
> I might try a new approach that follows how git is showing the historical
> releases in that each release will get a tag and for the stable branch that
> tracks the non snapshot wicket release it would move forward from release to
> release.
>
> Actually the build just failed with push-timer complaining about java6
> ism's.
>
> Mike
>
>
>
>> i was able to restore it off the 1.4.14 release tag. hopefully there
>> havent been commits in the interim.
>>
>> -igor
>>
>> 2010/12/29 Major Péter<ma...@sch.bme.hu>:
>>>
>>> I think the wicketstuff-core-1.4 branch got lost, the core project now
>>> only
>>> has the 1.5-SNAPSHOT stuff, at least that branch should be restored IMHO.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Peter
>>>
>>> 2010-12-29 22:50 keltezéssel, Igor Vaynberg írta:
>>>>
>>>> i think i got them split. core is already pushed, sandbox is incoming.
>>>>
>>>> we lost branches in the process, i dont think this is a big deal since
>>>> they were mostly used as tags to mark releases. on the other hand i
>>>> converted release branches to tags before i did the split, and those
>>>> seemed to stick around - so maybe we havent lost anything at all.
>>>>
>>>> -igor
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 1:43 PM, Martijn Dashorst
>>>> <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Great, I won't be of much help as I left my laptop at work due to a
>>>>> mishap with my car (apparent broken battery) and needing to entertain
>>>>> the AAA guy.
>>>>>
>>>>> Martijn
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wednesday, December 29, 2010, Igor Vaynberg<ig...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> i will play around with splitting and we can see what happens
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -igor
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 10:04 AM, James Carman
>>>>>> <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>> On Dec 29, 2010 12:49 PM, "Igor Vaynberg"<ig...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> i think core and sandbox are probably better names and more clearly
>>>>>>>> communicate the intent.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -igor
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 9:30 AM, Martijn Dashorst
>>>>>>>> <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Currently our wicketstuff repo at github is one gigantic repo
>>>>>>>>> containing everything. I'd like to propose to split the repository
>>>>>>>>> into two:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - github.com/wicketstuff/wicketstuff (containing just the
>>>>>>>>> core
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> project)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> - github.com/wicketstuff/archive (containing all the
>>>>>>>>> side projects)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The idea is that wicketstuff core is already a huge project, and
>>>>>>>>> I'd
>>>>>>>>> like to make the footprint contain just that, without the legacy
>>>>>>>>> projects that surround the core.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'd like to do this before folks start cloning away, so before we
>>>>>>>>> announce the availability. But if anyone wants to wait that's fine
>>>>>>>>> with me as well...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Anyone got ideas or a different opinion?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Martijn
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best:
>>>>>>>>> http://wicketinaction.com
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
>
>
Re: Wicketstuff@github: re-organize now or later?
Posted by Michael O'Cleirigh <mi...@rivulet.ca>.
I was able to add in a remote to the wicketstuff-core-1.4 branch from
the first import and then use git cherry-pick to pull in each of the 11
commits that had occurred since the 1.4.14 release tag was applied.
I've pushed my changes into the wicketstuff/core repository. This
should build the 1.4.15-SNAPSHOT version.
Once we have everything finalized and announced I will cut the 1.4.15
release and update the core-1.4.x branch to track 1.4.16-SNAPSHOT
Since about 1.4.10 I have been creating branches for each stable
wicketstuff-core release for the 1.4.stable.x point releases. Those
weren't preserved as branches but I think the tags will be sufficient.
I might try a new approach that follows how git is showing the
historical releases in that each release will get a tag and for the
stable branch that tracks the non snapshot wicket release it would move
forward from release to release.
Actually the build just failed with push-timer complaining about java6
ism's.
Mike
> i was able to restore it off the 1.4.14 release tag. hopefully there
> havent been commits in the interim.
>
> -igor
>
> 2010/12/29 Major Péter<ma...@sch.bme.hu>:
>> I think the wicketstuff-core-1.4 branch got lost, the core project now only
>> has the 1.5-SNAPSHOT stuff, at least that branch should be restored IMHO.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Peter
>>
>> 2010-12-29 22:50 keltezéssel, Igor Vaynberg írta:
>>> i think i got them split. core is already pushed, sandbox is incoming.
>>>
>>> we lost branches in the process, i dont think this is a big deal since
>>> they were mostly used as tags to mark releases. on the other hand i
>>> converted release branches to tags before i did the split, and those
>>> seemed to stick around - so maybe we havent lost anything at all.
>>>
>>> -igor
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 1:43 PM, Martijn Dashorst
>>> <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Great, I won't be of much help as I left my laptop at work due to a
>>>> mishap with my car (apparent broken battery) and needing to entertain
>>>> the AAA guy.
>>>>
>>>> Martijn
>>>>
>>>> On Wednesday, December 29, 2010, Igor Vaynberg<ig...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> i will play around with splitting and we can see what happens
>>>>>
>>>>> -igor
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 10:04 AM, James Carman
>>>>> <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:
>>>>>> +1
>>>>>> On Dec 29, 2010 12:49 PM, "Igor Vaynberg"<ig...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> i think core and sandbox are probably better names and more clearly
>>>>>>> communicate the intent.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -igor
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 9:30 AM, Martijn Dashorst
>>>>>>> <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Currently our wicketstuff repo at github is one gigantic repo
>>>>>>>> containing everything. I'd like to propose to split the repository
>>>>>>>> into two:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - github.com/wicketstuff/wicketstuff (containing just the
>>>>>>>> core
>>>>>> project)
>>>>>>>> - github.com/wicketstuff/archive (containing all the
>>>>>>>> side projects)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The idea is that wicketstuff core is already a huge project, and I'd
>>>>>>>> like to make the footprint contain just that, without the legacy
>>>>>>>> projects that surround the core.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'd like to do this before folks start cloning away, so before we
>>>>>>>> announce the availability. But if anyone wants to wait that's fine
>>>>>>>> with me as well...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Anyone got ideas or a different opinion?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Martijn
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best:
>>>>>>>> http://wicketinaction.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
Re: Wicketstuff@github: re-organize now or later?
Posted by Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com>.
i was able to restore it off the 1.4.14 release tag. hopefully there
havent been commits in the interim.
-igor
2010/12/29 Major Péter <ma...@sch.bme.hu>:
> I think the wicketstuff-core-1.4 branch got lost, the core project now only
> has the 1.5-SNAPSHOT stuff, at least that branch should be restored IMHO.
>
> Thanks,
> Peter
>
> 2010-12-29 22:50 keltezéssel, Igor Vaynberg írta:
>>
>> i think i got them split. core is already pushed, sandbox is incoming.
>>
>> we lost branches in the process, i dont think this is a big deal since
>> they were mostly used as tags to mark releases. on the other hand i
>> converted release branches to tags before i did the split, and those
>> seemed to stick around - so maybe we havent lost anything at all.
>>
>> -igor
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 1:43 PM, Martijn Dashorst
>> <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Great, I won't be of much help as I left my laptop at work due to a
>>> mishap with my car (apparent broken battery) and needing to entertain
>>> the AAA guy.
>>>
>>> Martijn
>>>
>>> On Wednesday, December 29, 2010, Igor Vaynberg<ig...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> i will play around with splitting and we can see what happens
>>>>
>>>> -igor
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 10:04 AM, James Carman
>>>> <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> +1
>>>>> On Dec 29, 2010 12:49 PM, "Igor Vaynberg"<ig...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> i think core and sandbox are probably better names and more clearly
>>>>>> communicate the intent.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -igor
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 9:30 AM, Martijn Dashorst
>>>>>> <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Currently our wicketstuff repo at github is one gigantic repo
>>>>>>> containing everything. I'd like to propose to split the repository
>>>>>>> into two:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - github.com/wicketstuff/wicketstuff (containing just the
>>>>>>> core
>>>>>
>>>>> project)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - github.com/wicketstuff/archive (containing all the
>>>>>>> side projects)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The idea is that wicketstuff core is already a huge project, and I'd
>>>>>>> like to make the footprint contain just that, without the legacy
>>>>>>> projects that surround the core.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'd like to do this before folks start cloning away, so before we
>>>>>>> announce the availability. But if anyone wants to wait that's fine
>>>>>>> with me as well...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Anyone got ideas or a different opinion?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Martijn
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best:
>>>>>>> http://wicketinaction.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
>
Re: Wicketstuff@github: re-organize now or later?
Posted by Major Péter <ma...@sch.bme.hu>.
I think the wicketstuff-core-1.4 branch got lost, the core project now
only has the 1.5-SNAPSHOT stuff, at least that branch should be restored
IMHO.
Thanks,
Peter
2010-12-29 22:50 keltezéssel, Igor Vaynberg írta:
> i think i got them split. core is already pushed, sandbox is incoming.
>
> we lost branches in the process, i dont think this is a big deal since
> they were mostly used as tags to mark releases. on the other hand i
> converted release branches to tags before i did the split, and those
> seemed to stick around - so maybe we havent lost anything at all.
>
> -igor
>
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 1:43 PM, Martijn Dashorst
> <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Great, I won't be of much help as I left my laptop at work due to a
>> mishap with my car (apparent broken battery) and needing to entertain
>> the AAA guy.
>>
>> Martijn
>>
>> On Wednesday, December 29, 2010, Igor Vaynberg<ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> i will play around with splitting and we can see what happens
>>>
>>> -igor
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 10:04 AM, James Carman
>>> <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:
>>>> +1
>>>> On Dec 29, 2010 12:49 PM, "Igor Vaynberg"<ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> i think core and sandbox are probably better names and more clearly
>>>>> communicate the intent.
>>>>>
>>>>> -igor
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 9:30 AM, Martijn Dashorst
>>>>> <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Currently our wicketstuff repo at github is one gigantic repo
>>>>>> containing everything. I'd like to propose to split the repository
>>>>>> into two:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - github.com/wicketstuff/wicketstuff (containing just the core
>>>> project)
>>>>>> - github.com/wicketstuff/archive (containing all the
>>>>>> side projects)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The idea is that wicketstuff core is already a huge project, and I'd
>>>>>> like to make the footprint contain just that, without the legacy
>>>>>> projects that surround the core.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd like to do this before folks start cloning away, so before we
>>>>>> announce the availability. But if anyone wants to wait that's fine
>>>>>> with me as well...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Anyone got ideas or a different opinion?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Martijn
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
Re: Wicketstuff@github: re-organize now or later?
Posted by Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com>.
i think i got them split. core is already pushed, sandbox is incoming.
we lost branches in the process, i dont think this is a big deal since
they were mostly used as tags to mark releases. on the other hand i
converted release branches to tags before i did the split, and those
seemed to stick around - so maybe we havent lost anything at all.
-igor
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 1:43 PM, Martijn Dashorst
<ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Great, I won't be of much help as I left my laptop at work due to a
> mishap with my car (apparent broken battery) and needing to entertain
> the AAA guy.
>
> Martijn
>
> On Wednesday, December 29, 2010, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> i will play around with splitting and we can see what happens
>>
>> -igor
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 10:04 AM, James Carman
>> <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:
>>> +1
>>> On Dec 29, 2010 12:49 PM, "Igor Vaynberg" <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> i think core and sandbox are probably better names and more clearly
>>>> communicate the intent.
>>>>
>>>> -igor
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 9:30 AM, Martijn Dashorst
>>>> <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Currently our wicketstuff repo at github is one gigantic repo
>>>>> containing everything. I'd like to propose to split the repository
>>>>> into two:
>>>>>
>>>>> - github.com/wicketstuff/wicketstuff (containing just the core
>>> project)
>>>>> - github.com/wicketstuff/archive (containing all the
>>>>> side projects)
>>>>>
>>>>> The idea is that wicketstuff core is already a huge project, and I'd
>>>>> like to make the footprint contain just that, without the legacy
>>>>> projects that surround the core.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd like to do this before folks start cloning away, so before we
>>>>> announce the availability. But if anyone wants to wait that's fine
>>>>> with me as well...
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyone got ideas or a different opinion?
>>>>>
>>>>> Martijn
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>
> --
> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
>
Re: Wicketstuff@github: re-organize now or later?
Posted by Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com>.
Great, I won't be of much help as I left my laptop at work due to a
mishap with my car (apparent broken battery) and needing to entertain
the AAA guy.
Martijn
On Wednesday, December 29, 2010, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> i will play around with splitting and we can see what happens
>
> -igor
>
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 10:04 AM, James Carman
> <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:
>> +1
>> On Dec 29, 2010 12:49 PM, "Igor Vaynberg" <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> i think core and sandbox are probably better names and more clearly
>>> communicate the intent.
>>>
>>> -igor
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 9:30 AM, Martijn Dashorst
>>> <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Currently our wicketstuff repo at github is one gigantic repo
>>>> containing everything. I'd like to propose to split the repository
>>>> into two:
>>>>
>>>> - github.com/wicketstuff/wicketstuff (containing just the core
>> project)
>>>> - github.com/wicketstuff/archive (containing all the
>>>> side projects)
>>>>
>>>> The idea is that wicketstuff core is already a huge project, and I'd
>>>> like to make the footprint contain just that, without the legacy
>>>> projects that surround the core.
>>>>
>>>> I'd like to do this before folks start cloning away, so before we
>>>> announce the availability. But if anyone wants to wait that's fine
>>>> with me as well...
>>>>
>>>> Anyone got ideas or a different opinion?
>>>>
>>>> Martijn
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
>>>>
>>
>
--
Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
Re: Wicketstuff@github: re-organize now or later?
Posted by Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com>.
i will play around with splitting and we can see what happens
-igor
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 10:04 AM, James Carman
<ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:
> +1
> On Dec 29, 2010 12:49 PM, "Igor Vaynberg" <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> i think core and sandbox are probably better names and more clearly
>> communicate the intent.
>>
>> -igor
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 9:30 AM, Martijn Dashorst
>> <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Currently our wicketstuff repo at github is one gigantic repo
>>> containing everything. I'd like to propose to split the repository
>>> into two:
>>>
>>> - github.com/wicketstuff/wicketstuff (containing just the core
> project)
>>> - github.com/wicketstuff/archive (containing all the
>>> side projects)
>>>
>>> The idea is that wicketstuff core is already a huge project, and I'd
>>> like to make the footprint contain just that, without the legacy
>>> projects that surround the core.
>>>
>>> I'd like to do this before folks start cloning away, so before we
>>> announce the availability. But if anyone wants to wait that's fine
>>> with me as well...
>>>
>>> Anyone got ideas or a different opinion?
>>>
>>> Martijn
>>>
>>> --
>>> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
>>>
>
Re: Wicketstuff@github: re-organize now or later?
Posted by James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>.
+1
On Dec 29, 2010 12:49 PM, "Igor Vaynberg" <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> i think core and sandbox are probably better names and more clearly
> communicate the intent.
>
> -igor
>
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 9:30 AM, Martijn Dashorst
> <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Currently our wicketstuff repo at github is one gigantic repo
>> containing everything. I'd like to propose to split the repository
>> into two:
>>
>> - github.com/wicketstuff/wicketstuff (containing just the core
project)
>> - github.com/wicketstuff/archive (containing all the
>> side projects)
>>
>> The idea is that wicketstuff core is already a huge project, and I'd
>> like to make the footprint contain just that, without the legacy
>> projects that surround the core.
>>
>> I'd like to do this before folks start cloning away, so before we
>> announce the availability. But if anyone wants to wait that's fine
>> with me as well...
>>
>> Anyone got ideas or a different opinion?
>>
>> Martijn
>>
>> --
>> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
>>
Re: Wicketstuff@github: re-organize now or later?
Posted by Jeremy Thomerson <je...@wickettraining.com>.
I agree.
Jeremy Thomerson
http://wickettraining.com
-- sent from my "smart" phone, so please excuse spelling, formatting, or
compiler errors
On Dec 29, 2010 11:49 AM, "Igor Vaynberg" <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
i think core and sandbox are probably better names and more clearly
communicate the intent.
-igor
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 9:30 AM, Martijn Dashorst
<ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Currently o...
Re: Wicketstuff@github: re-organize now or later?
Posted by Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com>.
true fact!
Martijn
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 6:48 PM, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> i think core and sandbox are probably better names and more clearly
> communicate the intent.
>
> -igor
>
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 9:30 AM, Martijn Dashorst
> <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Currently our wicketstuff repo at github is one gigantic repo
>> containing everything. I'd like to propose to split the repository
>> into two:
>>
>> - github.com/wicketstuff/wicketstuff (containing just the core project)
>> - github.com/wicketstuff/archive (containing all the
>> side projects)
>>
>> The idea is that wicketstuff core is already a huge project, and I'd
>> like to make the footprint contain just that, without the legacy
>> projects that surround the core.
>>
>> I'd like to do this before folks start cloning away, so before we
>> announce the availability. But if anyone wants to wait that's fine
>> with me as well...
>>
>> Anyone got ideas or a different opinion?
>>
>> Martijn
>>
>> --
>> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
>>
>
--
Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
Re: Wicketstuff@github: re-organize now or later?
Posted by Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com>.
i think core and sandbox are probably better names and more clearly
communicate the intent.
-igor
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 9:30 AM, Martijn Dashorst
<ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Currently our wicketstuff repo at github is one gigantic repo
> containing everything. I'd like to propose to split the repository
> into two:
>
> - github.com/wicketstuff/wicketstuff (containing just the core project)
> - github.com/wicketstuff/archive (containing all the
> side projects)
>
> The idea is that wicketstuff core is already a huge project, and I'd
> like to make the footprint contain just that, without the legacy
> projects that surround the core.
>
> I'd like to do this before folks start cloning away, so before we
> announce the availability. But if anyone wants to wait that's fine
> with me as well...
>
> Anyone got ideas or a different opinion?
>
> Martijn
>
> --
> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
>