[Scons-dev] Hummm…

Sat Jun 11 16:09:43 EDT 2016

Off list.

I use "git commit -p" a lot to make small targeted commits (see the github pull request). In this case I’ve been doing incremental fixes as I discover new issues running bootstrap and tests. I obviously broke python2 as well but I need to get a handle on the size of the job.

I tried using hg and the main problem was that the commands were fairly close to git but not close enough.

I wasn’t trying to make a political statement about using git. Just that it was the only way to quickly make my patches available for others to see. Unfortunately I’m on work travelling round Europe and also seeing family for the next month so I won’t have much time for hg practice.

— 
Tim Jenness

> On Jun 11, 2016, at 20:59 , Bill Deegan <bill at baddogconsulting.com> wrote:
> 
> Tim,
> 
> Working natively on bitbucket with hg will make this whole process considerably easier for all.
> 
> The amount of HG knowledge you need to work on scons is minimal.
> 
> hg clone
> hg commit
> (hg revert for an oops)
> hg push
> hg pull
> hg update
> 
> That's about it.  (If you need other commands chances are you're doing something silly, at least in the context of py2/3 work)
> 
> As I've stated many times before with regards to the py2/3 development. I'd vastly prefer smaller more frequent pull requests than a huge pull request with tons of changes.
> As you can see from my own contributions to this effort. Many small pull requests which were then merged and run through buildbot to see if anything broke on any build slave (linux & win32).
> 
> I'd prefer get something additional working (hopefully without breaking any of py2 or py3), commit, pull request,etc.. 
> 
> Doing this work on github with git means likely you're going to throw a big pull request infrequently.
> 
> If you'd like to set up a time to meet on IRC to get you up and going with hg and/or to coordinate pull requests with merging, I'm generally available during US waking hours (EST through PST (or is it DT now.. I never remember).
> 
> At some point (It's possible (likely?) by end of year) we may move to git and github (see discussion in other mailing list threads), but that won't be right now.
> 
> -Bill
> 
> 
> 
> On Sat, Jun 11, 2016 at 12:36 PM, Daniel Holth <dholth at gmail.com <mailto:dholth at gmail.com>> wrote:
> Yes you should be able to convert just fine with any of a variety of methods. For example just the hg import [patches] command or more complicated http://hg-git.github.io <http://hg-git.github.io/>
> 
> On Sat, Jun 11, 2016, 11:43 Tim Jenness <tjenness at lsst.org <mailto:tjenness at lsst.org>> wrote:
> 
> I agree. I don’t want to upset the apple cart and I’m definitely not trying to force a switch through. The github import was trivial so I’m more than happy to delete and reimport as scons default evolves. Of course, I have no idea if hg can import patch sets exported from git with format-patch.
> 
> — 
> Tim Jenness
> 
>> On Jun 11, 2016, at 03:25 , Dirk Baechle <tshortik at gmx.de <mailto:tshortik at gmx.de>> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi there, 
>> 
>> I don't like being under pressure, so what's basically wrong with keeping everything "as is" and pulling Tim's changes directly into our hg repo? One might argue that this would impede the progress somewhat by making it harder for Tim to merge changes back from "default ". But that's more his problem...at least it doesn't make me leap into action immediately. 
>> 
>> Best regards, 
>> 
>> Dirk
>> 
>> Am 11. Juni 2016 08:27:57 MESZ, schrieb Russel Winder <russel at winder.org.uk <mailto:russel at winder.org.uk>>:
>> It just struck me that Tim Jenness has (subtly :-) switched the current
>> active Python 3 work from Mercurial on BitBucket to Git on GitHub. We
>> thus are under pressure to:
>> 
>> a. all get stuck in using Git on GitHub as a temporary measure so as to
>> get the evolving PR merged into the Mercurial on BitBucket mainline
>> asap and hence avoid a rift.
>> 
>> b. switch to Git on BitBucket and transfer Tim's stuff back to
>> BitBucket.
>> 
>> c. switch to Git on GitHub.
>> 
>> Clearly c is perhaps overly revolutionary, especially at such short
>> notice. b might be revolutionary and will annoy a lot of people but it
>> will please a lot of people, the question is which group is in the
>> majority. a is the path of least resistance (and as we know resistance
>> if futile), and so may be the thing for people to do.
>> 
>> I have taken a clone of Tim's Git repository and am playing with it,
>> not quite as I type, but very shortly afterwards. 
>>   
>> 
>> -- 
>> Sent from my Android with K-9 Mail._______________________________________________
>> Scons-dev mailing list
>> Scons-dev at scons.org <mailto:Scons-dev at scons.org>
>> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev <https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev>
> _______________________________________________
> Scons-dev mailing list
> Scons-dev at scons.org <mailto:Scons-dev at scons.org>
> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev <https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Scons-dev mailing list
> Scons-dev at scons.org <mailto:Scons-dev at scons.org>
> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev <https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Scons-dev mailing list
> Scons-dev at scons.org
> https://pairlist2.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/scons-dev

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://pairlist2.pair.net/pipermail/scons-dev/attachments/20160611/eb2ce03a/attachment.html>