No merge/resync in a while

[dres]

Any planned? If not can I get the tailor configs/etc used to do the
resync?

Thanks
Jim

[E. Wing]

Sorry, I haven't had time to focus on it. One problem I hit was I
upgraded my Mercurial version and I think it is incompatible with
Tailor now. I haven't had time to pursue a fix. (Maybe you might be
able to track down the Tailor people in their IRC channel or
something?)

I believe everything I do to do the sync is documented on the CMakeLua
site. Let me know if something is missing. If you want Git (and maybe
Mercurial) write access, after you get everything resolved, I can
arrange that.

Thanks,
Eric

[Peter Kümmel]

Hi Jim,

I wanna switch to git, because something went wrong when we started
with hg: there are several repositories just for a branch,
http://www.assembla.com/wiki/show/CMakeLua/Sandbox_Repository_Locations

We also don't need all the original checkins in our repository, this
makes too much noise and we don't see our own changes any more.

I've tried to extract our changes but it failed because in 500
mercurial files the cvs $DATE is expanded by / and not by - so the
diff against cvs is very big. Before fiddling around with this patch
patches I think I will apply the relevant changes by hand.

I assume the master CMakeLua repository is the one with the most actual
patches, some stuff is in the sandbox4, but as I can see sandbox1-3 are
obsolete, but we have to check.

The last update on master was 2008-04-14. I wanna do a cvs checkout
of -D2008-04-14 and then overwrite the code with our hg files, this
gives us all changes against cvs. Without the $DATE changes the patch
isn't that big, and could be applied by hand to a clean cvs checkout
of -D2008-04-14. With a simple cvs update we should have our changes
in the actual code.
Any better ideas? I'm sure there are much more ingenious ways of
handling this but it will work.

Peter

[E. Wing]

Just a quick reminder. We actually use both Git and Mercurial. The Git
repo is the staging repo from CVS so we can merge into Mercurial. The
reason I did it this way is because it is not easy to share changes
with the typical Git-to-SVN like bridges. The original Git/SVN repo is
a bottleneck because the SVN (or CVS data in our case) is not designed
to be distributed.


In principle, if you wanted to 'start over', you could do a diff
(patch) between the up-to-date Mercurial repo that you want to use and
the Git repo (or the official CVS repo) and apply it to anything you
want. (Though this works much better if you could do one last update
on the Git repo and merge one last time in Mercurial so everything is
up-to-date.) This is what I envisioned our final step would be when we
finally finished. We would need to provide a final patch to Kitware
that could be applied to official CVS and this is how I intended to do
it.


Also, be warned, I picked Mercurial as the front-end over Git because
Git support on Windows sucks and most Windows users aren't going to
put up with installing Unix-like environments on Windows.


-Eric

[Peter Kümmel]

Thanks for reminder! I complete forgot the git repsitory!

E. Wing wrote:
> Just a quick reminder. We actually use both Git and Mercurial. The Git
> repo is the staging repo from CVS so we can merge into Mercurial. The
> reason I did it this way is because it is not easy to share changes
> with the typical Git-to-SVN like bridges. The original Git/SVN repo is
> a bottleneck because the SVN (or CVS data in our case) is not designed
> to be distributed.

I think we don't need any cvs-to-something bridge, because be don't have
any advantage of seeing the cvs commits. It would be enough to update with
released cmake source code, or update our code from time to time with a cvs
checkout.

>
>
> In principle, if you wanted to 'start over', you could do a diff
> (patch) between the up-to-date Mercurial repo that you want to use and
> the Git repo (or the official CVS repo) and apply it to anything you
> want. (Though this works much better if you could do one last update
> on the Git repo and merge one last time in Mercurial so everything is
> up-to-date.) This is what I envisioned our final step would be when we
> finally finished. We would need to provide a final patch to Kitware
> that could be applied to official CVS and this is how I intended to do
> it.

Good idea to use the git repository for extracting the patch! Maybe
this way I could avoid the noisy diffs.

>
>
> Also, be warned, I picked Mercurial as the front-end over Git because
> Git support on Windows sucks and most Windows users aren't going to
> put up with installing Unix-like environments on Windows.

I am also on Windows and using git is no problem there.
And if someone wanna hack cmake, I don't think he has a problem with
Unix-like tools on Windows.

And at the moment nobody is working on cmakelua, so it could not
become more worse ;)

Peter

[E. Wing]

So FYI, I got an updated/fixed version of Tailor. I resynced the Git
repo with CVS. So if anybody would like to try to hg merge CMakeLua
against it, be my guest.