[Geany-devel] geany on github; why not?

[Enrico Tröger]

On Tue, 04 Oct 2011 23:50:06 +0200, Colomban wrote:

>Le 04/10/2011 23:37, Jiří Techet a écrit :
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I'm trying to get everything ready for the conversion and there are
>> still a few points unresolved:
>> 
>>> I have a few comments (and questions) myself:
>>>
>>> 1. Some branch names should be renamed (e.g. Geany-0_19_1) because
>>> they have the same name as tags and they are ambiguous when doing
>>> "git checkout". Some naming scheme for stable branches should be
>>> invented.
>> 
>> I was proposing to have two digit branches and three digit tags:
>> 
>> Geany-0_19 - maintenance branch
>> Geany-0_19_0 - tag
>> Geany-0_19_1 - tag
>> Geany-0_19_2 - tag
>> 
>> Do you agree or do you prefer some different naming scheme?
>
>I don't mind much, but it looks sensible since it quite follows current
>scheme and is clear.  So yes, I agree.

What about changing the underscore by a point to make the version
number more familiar?
I don't remember why I chose the underscore scheme but I know this
decision is very, very old. Either it was back in the CVS days or early
when migrating from CVS to SVN (this was in late 2005 or early 2006,
IIRC). Either I was afraid using points could cause problems or I read
somewhere (maybe SF docs) better to use underscores or I was just drunk.
Since now, after the GIT merge all references would need to be adjusted
at all or they simply die, I guess we can also change the names.



>>> [...]
>>>
>>> 3. I haven't found a merge point for the "dynamic-editor-menu"
>>> branch. Has it been merged to trunk?
>> 
>> Does anyone know? If not, I'd just delete this branch.
>
>AFAIK it hasn't been merged, but I'm not sure the code it holds is
>still relevant, although the idea looks interesting.  Maybe Enrico or
>Nick would know more?

Is this branch still present somewhere? I can't find it in SVN.
If I remember this was the branch where I tried to build the editor
menu dynamically using GtkActions but I never completed it and finally
dropped it. So, I'd say there is no need to migrate it if it even still
exists somewhere.


Regards,
Enrico

-- 
Get my GPG key from http://www.uvena.de/pub.asc
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.geany.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20111006/9d11e3ab/attachment.pgp>