Re: [cherrypy-users] MIrror on Github?

[Ronnie Ghose]

clarification: an official repo that is updating in mirror ideally so one could push to github / bitbucket.

On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Ronnie Ghose <ronnie...@gmail.com> wrote:

I don't suppose there's anyway you guys would consider mirroring on github? 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "cherrypy-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cherrypy-user...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to cherryp...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cherrypy-users?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

[Anders Langworthy]

On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 04:30:44PM -0500, Ronnie Ghose wrote:
> clarification: an official repo that is updating in mirror ideally so
> one could push to github / bitbucket.

The bitbucket repo is about as official as it gets:
https://bitbucket.org/cherrypy

> On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Ronnie Ghose <ronnie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I don't suppose there's anyway you guys would consider mirroring on
> > github?

--

Anders Langworthy

[Ronnie Ghose]

........ but github? :(

[Joel Rivera]

I'm seriously considering to implement a mirror on github, It might give more visibility to the project and it seems kinda easy with hg-git.

I'm not saying that we should move to github because is more popular, but to have just a little bridge for the githubers, a lot of people look for code in the github search and after the pycon experience almost everyone that I introduce to the project  was kinda a surprised that we don't have a github repository, in particular because they feel strange to use mercurial, even in the python community.

What do you guys think?

[Walter Woods]

For what it's worth, I also think this would be awesome.  Github has a really nice interface for browsing code, and git itself is more ubiquitous than mercurial.

[Michiel Overtoom]

On Apr 21, 2013, at 01:28, Joel Rivera wrote:

> I'm not saying that we should move to github because is more popular, but to have just a little bridge for the githubers

Is it two-way? What happens if someone forks CherryPy on github, modifies something and creates a pull request? How will that show up on Bitbucket? And what about the issue tracker? Are the issues shared too between Bitbucket and github?

--
"If you don't know, the thing to do is not to get scared, but to learn." - Ayn Rand

[Nick Repole]

Count me among those who'd love to see this. I think exposure wise it'd really help.

[Sylvain Hellegouarch]

I don't mind either way but if people are interested, it might be a good idea indeed :)

- Sylvain
http://www.defuze.org
http://twitter.com/lawouach

[Lakin Wecker]

I am generally in favour of more exposure.  MIchiel Overtoom's question would be my only concern. It would be a shame if we generated pull requests that were ignored because it was a pain to get them pulled all the way into the mercurial repository.

Lakin

[Ronnie Ghose]

yesyesyes +1 :D

[Cooper, Andrew]

Given the following static file configurations

Both the zip and exe files work but the msi file loads the file as text.

 

How can I force it to download ?

 

'/support/Uplink.msi':

    {'tools.staticfile.on': True,

     'tools.staticfile.filename': '/apps/Uplink.msi',

     'tools.staticfile.content_types': {'msi': 'application/octet-stream'}},

 

'/support/Uplink.zip':

    {'tools.staticfile.on': True,

     'tools.staticfile.filename': '/apps/Uplink.zip',

     'tools.staticfile.content_types': {'zip': 'application/x-download'}},

 

'/support/Uplink.exe':

    {'tools.staticfile.on': True,

     'tools.staticfile.filename': '/apps/Uplink.exe',

     'tools.staticfile.content_types': {'exe': 'application/x-download'}},

 

 

Andy

[Cooper, Andrew]

Can anybody help with this ? I would prefer to serve the msi as a static link rather than as a zip file

--

[Joel Rivera]

Hi Andrew,

Why are you using a very generic mime type of octet-stream instead of
something like "application/x-ole-storage" or "text/mspg-legacyinfo",
according to [1] that are the appropriates mime types.

'/support/Uplink.msi':
{'tools.staticfile.on': True,
'tools.staticfile.filename': '/apps/Uplink.msi',
'tools.staticfile.content_types': {'msi':

'application/x-ole-storage'}},


Cheers.

[1] http://filext.com/file-extension/MSI

--
Rivera²

[Cooper, Andrew]

Thanks for the reply.

I had tried multiple mime types...including the one suggested below.
But I still cannot get the issue resolved

I'm serving the URL request from Flash NavigateToURL(......,'_blank');

On My system and one of my colleagues using Chrome and IE(8) both render the msi as text in the browser
Firefox does the correct thing and asks to save it

On Another Colleagues Mac, Chrome/FF/Safari all do the right thing

On another Colleagues PC, Chrome downloads it fine.


I've checked the FileTypes association and it is still set to Microsoft

Has anyone else had similar issues

Andy