git updates stalled?

git updates stalled?

[Peter Stephenson]

Has the SourceForge update confused the git update?  The last entry in
ChangeLog appears to be from the 24th of January.

I have an increased interest in this since I now need to use https
to get at the source code from work...

pws

Re: git updates stalled?

[Frank Terbeck]

[CC:ing Wayne, who runs the CVS2Git mirroring script]

Peter Stephenson wrote:
> Has the SourceForge update confused the git update?  The last entry in
> ChangeLog appears to be from the 24th of January.
>
> I have an increased interest in this since I now need to use https
> to get at the source code from work...

This is still the case. Could you take a look, Wayne?

Regards, Frank

Re: git updates stalled?

[Wayne Davison]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 872 bytes --]

On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 4:59 AM, Frank Terbeck <ft@bewatermyfriend.org>wrote:

> [CC:ing Wayne, who runs the CVS2Git mirroring script]
>

Sadly, you did not.


> This is still the case. Could you take a look, Wayne?
>

I turned it off when you guys requested a project upgrade, since that
causes the git repo to change to a new one.  The new setup also broke my
update script, since there is no longer a project-members page to be able
to find the full name of the committers, so I'll need to rework that (it
looks like I'll need to lookup names one at a time now).  It also appears
that developers on the project aren't given any write permission (only
admins), so I don't think I'll be able to commit anything to the new git
repo.

I also figured that the git change was imminent, and would interfere with
starting to use git directly.  Has that been delayed?

..wayne..

Re: git updates stalled?

[Frank Terbeck]

Wayne Davison wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 4:59 AM, Frank Terbeck <ft@bewatermyfriend.org>wrote:
>> [CC:ing Wayne, who runs the CVS2Git mirroring script]
>
> Sadly, you did not.

Hm, the headers look like this on my end:

From: Frank Terbeck <ft@bewatermyfriend.org>
Subject: Re: git updates stalled?
To: zsh-workers@zsh.org
Cc: Wayne Davison <wayned@users.sourceforge.net>

>> This is still the case. Could you take a look, Wayne?
>
> I turned it off when you guys requested a project upgrade, since that
> causes the git repo to change to a new one.  The new setup also broke my
> update script, since there is no longer a project-members page to be able
> to find the full name of the committers, so I'll need to rework that (it
> looks like I'll need to lookup names one at a time now).  It also appears
> that developers on the project aren't given any write permission (only
> admins), so I don't think I'll be able to commit anything to the new git
> repo.

Oh, that's bummer. :-/

> I also figured that the git change was imminent, and would interfere with
> starting to use git directly.  Has that been delayed?

I guess being in a situation such as this should be more motivation for
zsh to switch to git as its main VCS. I don't think anyone should put
time into sf-username -> full-name conversion and all that. It's not
worth it.

I think somebody should setup a git-repo to test whether everything
works smoothly from a native git build. $ZSH_PATCHLEVEL comes to mind.
We had patches for making that work, IIRC. We should get the missing
commits from CVS, fix the commiter's name manually put that on top of
the rest.

When everything looks good, we should just switch over to git.

I'll be quite busy the first half of the week. I can only get on this
on Thursday. So, maybe someone will beat me to it. :-)

Regards, Frank

Re: git updates stalled?

[Wayne Davison]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 695 bytes --]

On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 9:35 AM, Wayne Davison <wayned@users.sourceforge.net
> wrote:

> it looks like I'll need to lookup names one at a time now.
>

I coded that up and tested it, and it's working.

 It also appears that developers on the project aren't given any write
> permission (only admins), so I don't think I'll be able to commit anything
> to the new git repo.
>

At least, that's what the admin page seems to say.  However, I do have
commit rights to the new repo, so I updated it.  (I also updated the old
git repo when I was testing my update script, so they both should be at the
same spot now -- eventually the old repo will become read-only, but
apparently not yet.)

..wayne..

Re: git updates stalled?

[Wayne Davison]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 305 bytes --]

On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Wayne Davison <
wayned@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:

> I do have commit rights to the new repo, so I updated it.
>

I neglected to mention that I have it updating from cron again, so let me
know when we get to the point where we want that to be switched off.

..wayne..

Re: git updates stalled?

[Bart Schaefer]

On Feb 17,  9:35am, Wayne Davison wrote:
}
} looks like I'll need to lookup names one at a time now).  It also appears
} that developers on the project aren't given any write permission (only
} admins), so I don't think I'll be able to commit anything to the new git
} repo.

I'm poking around in the admin UI trying to figure out how to enable git
commits for developers, since we obviously need that whether or not we
switch entirely to git in the short term.

I'll send a follow-up whether or not I figure it out.

-- 
Barton E. Schaefer

Re: git updates stalled?

[Bart Schaefer]

On Feb 17, 10:45am, Wayne Davison wrote:
}
} I coded that up and tested it, and it's working.

As I just discovered, somewhat to my confusion since I hadn't yet changed
anything about the permissions ...
 
} > It also appears that developers on the project aren't given any
} > write permission (only admins), so I don't think I'll be able to
} > commit anything to the new git repo.
} 
} At least, that's what the admin page seems to say.  However, I do have
} commit rights to the new repo, so I updated it.  (I also updated the old
} git repo when I was testing my update script, so they both should be at
} the same spot now -- eventually the old repo will become read-only, but
} apparently not yet.)

I'm a little confused here ...

According to the admin pages the git "tool" is not yet installed, but if
I click on it, it offers to install it under the name "Code", which I
declined to do because there is already a "Code" tool installed, and if I
look at that, it's a git repo as well.

Permissions under the currently-installed "Code" tool allow developers
to create, moderate, and write, along with read, post, etc. that lesser
users are able to do.  Perhaps Wayne was looking at the project "User
Permissions" for which the help is remarkably unhelpful with respect to
explaining exactly what those permissions govern.

Access for the current "Code" repository is shown as

	git clone ssh://git.code.sf.net/p/zsh/code zsh-code

Does anyone think we should also install the "git" tool?

Re: git updates stalled?

[Wayne Davison]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 820 bytes --]

On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Bart Schaefer
<schaefer@brasslantern.com>wrote:

> According to the admin pages the git "tool" is not yet installed, but if I
> click on it, it offers to install it under the name "Code", which I declined
> to do because there is  lready a "Code" tool installed, and if I look at
> that, it's a git repo as well.
>

Your confusion is that you can install multiple git repos.  The code one is
the current one, and adding a git tool would just add another.  We should
probably add one for the web site, which doesn't seem to have gotten
auto-migrated.

Perhaps Wayne was looking at the project "User Permissions" for which the
> help is remarkably unhelpful with respect to explaining exactly what those
> permissions govern.
>

Yeah, sorry -- I was looking at the wrong page.

..wayne..

Re: git updates stalled?

[Oliver Kiddle]

Wayne Davison wrote:
> I also figured that the git change was imminent, and would interfere with
> starting to use git directly.  Has that been delayed?

I was leaving a little time to see if anyone wanted to further comment
on the zsh-development-guide cleanup from a week ago.

I would suggest that we go ahead with the switch now and get the whole
thing over with. How about if Wayne simply picks a time convenient to
him and lets everyone know so we don't try to commit anything in the
middle of it?

Once that's done, we can arrange to apply Aaron's patch from 30840.
Possibly with modifications as per 30870. Aaron:?

I've prepared a couple of further trivial patches to completion
functions so as to be able to test it.

Oliver

Re: git updates stalled?

[Aaron Schrab]

At 13:35 +0100 18 Feb 2013, Oliver Kiddle <okiddle@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>Once that's done, we can arrange to apply Aaron's patch from 30840.
>Possibly with modifications as per 30870. Aaron:?

The actual modification was described in 30841, only mentioned in 30870.  
But to simplify things, here's an updated version with that modification 
already applied.

The line below would allow this message to be fed as-is to `git am -c`, 
except that the commit message below will need to be modified to include 
the sequence number for this message.

--- 8< ---

Subject: [PATCH] Generate patch level using `git describe`

Generate the patch level using `git describe` rather than relying on the
CVS $Revision$.  Need to use the `--tags` option, since currently there
are no annotated tags.  The `--long` option should be used so that the
output will always be in the 'tag-commits-hash' format rather than just
naming a tag when that would fully describe the current commit.

Since changes to the patchlevel could now be caused by changes to any
file, force the rule to be called every time that `make` is run.  Only
update the file when there are actually changes to prevent unnecessary
rebuilding of other build products (currently just `params.o` and
`zsh`).
---
 Src/zsh.mdd |    8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Src/zsh.mdd b/Src/zsh.mdd
index 6e90776..420e8fc 100644
--- a/Src/zsh.mdd
+++ b/Src/zsh.mdd
@@ -39,10 +39,10 @@ params.o: patchlevel.h
 version.h: $(sdir_top)/Config/version.mk zshcurses.h zshterm.h
 	echo '#define ZSH_VERSION "'$(VERSION)'"' > $@
 
-patchlevel.h: $(sdir_top)/ChangeLog
-	sed -ne \
-	's/^\* *\$$''Revision: \(.*\) ''\$$/#define ZSH_PATCHLEVEL "\1"/p' \
-	$(sdir_top)/ChangeLog >patchlevel.h
+patchlevel.h: FORCE
+	echo '#define ZSH_PATCHLEVEL "'`git describe --tags --long`'"' > $@.tmp
+	cmp $@ $@.tmp && rm -f $@.tmp || mv $@.tmp $@
+FORCE:
 
 zshcurses.h: ../config.h
 	@if test x$(ZSH_CURSES_H) != x; then \
-- 
1.7.10.4

Re: git updates stalled?

[Phil Pennock]

On 2013-02-17 at 11:19 -0800, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> Access for the current "Code" repository is shown as
> 
> 	git clone ssh://git.code.sf.net/p/zsh/code zsh-code

Beware that there is no "standard git user" which dispatches based upon
the SSH key fingerprint, so this is very different from the GitHub
model.

The above command assumes that you've already arranged that ssh will use
your SF account-name for talking to sf.net machines.

This (in ~/.ssh/config) fixes it to work for me:

Host *.sf.net *.sourceforge.net
	User pdpennock
	ForwardAgent no
	ForwardX11 no
	GSSAPIAuthentication no

> Does anyone think we should also install the "git" tool?

(I am not ignoring this, I just lack knowledge of what SF are doing
 across their product versions, to be able to give a meaningful answer.)

-Phil

Re: git updates stalled?

[Bart Schaefer]

On Feb 19,  2:45am, Phil Pennock wrote:
} Subject: Re: git updates stalled?
}
} On 2013-02-17 at 11:19 -0800, Bart Schaefer wrote:
} > Access for the current "Code" repository is shown as
} > 
} > 	git clone ssh://git.code.sf.net/p/zsh/code zsh-code
} 
} The above command assumes that you've already arranged that ssh will use
} your SF account-name for talking to sf.net machines.

Right, it also works to insert <username>@ just after the //.
 
} > Does anyone think we should also install the "git" tool?
} 
} (I am not ignoring this, I just lack knowledge of what SF are doing
}  across their product versions, to be able to give a meaningful answer.)

Wayne already answered this, it's for installing multiple repositories.

Re: git updates stalled?

[Frank Terbeck]

Aaron Schrab wrote:
> At 13:35 +0100 18 Feb 2013, Oliver Kiddle <okiddle@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
Wayne Davison wrote:
>>> I also figured that the git change was imminent, and would interfere with
>>> starting to use git directly.  Has that been delayed?
>>
>>I was leaving a little time to see if anyone wanted to further comment
>>on the zsh-development-guide cleanup from a week ago.
>>
>>I would suggest that we go ahead with the switch now and get the whole
>>thing over with. How about if Wayne simply picks a time convenient to

Agreed.

>>him and lets everyone know so we don't try to commit anything in the
>>middle of it?

That sounds like a plan.

>>Once that's done, we can arrange to apply Aaron's patch from 30840.
>>Possibly with modifications as per 30870. Aaron:?
>
> The actual modification was described in 30841, only mentioned in 30870.  But
> to simplify things, here's an updated version with that modification already
> applied.
>
> The line below would allow this message to be fed as-is to `git am -c`, except
> that the commit message below will need to be modified to include the sequence
> number for this message.
>
> --- 8< ---
>
> Subject: [PATCH] Generate patch level using `git describe`
[...]

I've applied Aaron's patch and the result looks good:

% print $ZSH_PATCHLEVEL
zsh-5.0.2-26-g85ea877

Everything else looks good, too.

>>I've prepared a couple of further trivial patches to completion
>>functions so as to be able to test it.

Great!   I'd vote for sooner rather than later, now. ;)

Thoughts?

Regards, Frank

Re: git updates stalled?

[Simon Ruderich]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1093 bytes --]

On Fri, Mar 01, 2013 at 02:16:29PM +0100, Frank Terbeck wrote:
> Great!   I'd vote for sooner rather than later, now. ;)
>
> Thoughts?

Hello,

Has the switch already happened? There are a few commits in the
new Git repository [1] which aren't in the old one [2], so I'm
not sure.

If yes, I'll update the website to remove the CVS parts and
update the Git instructions. And I think we should add the URL of
the Git repository to `Etc/zsh-development-guide`.

As was already mentioned, the web repository should also be
migrated.

Btw. is there a public list of all Zsh Git repositories on
Sourceforge available?

Would it be possible to keep the old Git repository [2] in sync
with the new one, at least for a while? This would help people
which only use the old one. And when discontinuing it maybe push
a commit mentioning the switch to make sure everybody knows.

Regards,
Simon

[1]: ssh://git.code.sf.net/p/zsh/code
[2]: git://zsh.git.sf.net/gitroot/zsh/zsh
-- 
+ privacy is necessary
+ using gnupg http://gnupg.org
+ public key id: 0x92FEFDB7E44C32F9

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: git updates stalled?

[Bart Schaefer]

On Mar 6, 10:43pm, Simon Ruderich wrote:
}
} Has the switch already happened? There are a few commits in the
} new Git repository [1] which aren't in the old one [2], so I'm
} not sure.

The switch has not happened as far as I'm aware.  Are there commits in
either git that are not in CVS?

Re: git updates stalled?

[Simon Ruderich]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 325 bytes --]

On Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 09:53:21PM -0800, Bart Schaefer wrote:
> The switch has not happened as far as I'm aware.  Are there commits in
> either git that are not in CVS?

No. CVS has all commits AFAICS.

Regards,
Simon
-- 
+ privacy is necessary
+ using gnupg http://gnupg.org
+ public key id: 0x92FEFDB7E44C32F9

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: git updates stalled?

[Jérémie Roquet]

Hi everyone,

2013/3/6 Simon Ruderich <simon@ruderich.org>:
> Has the switch already happened? There are a few commits in the
> new Git repository [1] which aren't in the old one [2], so I'm
> not sure.
>
> If yes, I'll update the website to remove the CVS parts and
> update the Git instructions. And I think we should add the URL of
> the Git repository to `Etc/zsh-development-guide`.
>
> [1]: ssh://git.code.sf.net/p/zsh/code
> [2]: git://zsh.git.sf.net/gitroot/zsh/zsh

Since the old git repository has not been kept in sync since
mid-february, could someone update the git URL on
http://zsh.sourceforge.net/Arc/git.html , please ?

Thanks in advance,

-- 
Jérémie

Re: git updates stalled?

[Simon Ruderich]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 592 bytes --]

On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 04:09:34PM +0100, Jérémie Roquet wrote:
> Since the old git repository has not been kept in sync since
> mid-february, could someone update the git URL on
> http://zsh.sourceforge.net/Arc/git.html , please?

Hello Jérémie,

Thanks for your report. I've updated the git clone URL [1]; also
committed in the repository [2].

Regards,
Simon

[1]: http://zsh.sourceforge.net/Arc/git.html
[2]: http://zsh.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=zsh/web;a=summary
-- 
+ privacy is necessary
+ using gnupg http://gnupg.org
+ public key id: 0x92FEFDB7E44C32F9

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: git updates stalled?

[Jérémie Roquet]

2013/3/29 Simon Ruderich <simon@ruderich.org>:
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 04:09:34PM +0100, Jérémie Roquet wrote:
>> Since the old git repository has not been kept in sync since
>> mid-february, could someone update the git URL on
>> http://zsh.sourceforge.net/Arc/git.html , please?
>
> Thanks for your report. I've updated the git clone URL [1]; also
> committed in the repository [2].

Thank you Simon!

-- 
Jérémie

Re: git updates stalled?

[Wayne Davison]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1177 bytes --]

On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 5:16 AM, Frank Terbeck <ft@bewatermyfriend.org>wrote:

> I've applied Aaron's patch and the result looks good:
>
[...]

> Great!   I'd vote for sooner rather than later, now. ;)
>

We may as well pull the trigger now.  I've stopped the cvs -> git mirroring
cronjob.  I have created a Webcode git and pushed that from the old git
repos to the new, and then renamed the 2 old repos so that they won't be
found by people who have an old link or old clone.

New repos (use ssh|git|http|https protocol, as desired):

ssh://git.code.sf.net/p/zsh/code
ssh://git.code.sf.net/p/zsh/web

Next steps:

- Someone needs to check-in Aaron's changes as the first git-specific
commit.
- When ready, someone can hit "delete" on the Cvs tool (on the admin page)
-- this won't delete the cvs, but will remove it from the headings.
- We may want to rename the zsh dir in the cvs checkout too, similar to the
git rename.
- If everything is ok, we could go ahead and delete the old-style git repos
(the ones I just renamed).  We may want to leave the cvs repo around for a
while.

I'll leave the first 2 steps to others.  I'd be glad to do the other 2, as
desired.

..wayne..

Re: git updates stalled?

[Frank Terbeck]

Wayne Davison wrote:
[...]
> ssh://git.code.sf.net/p/zsh/code

Note that for cloning via ssh, you need to supply your sourceforge
username as well: ssh://<user-name-here>@git.code.sf.net/p/zsh/code

> - Someone needs to check-in Aaron's changes as the first git-specific
> commit.

I've done that. I think it was just this one change change in the end.
I'm Cc:ing Aaron to make sure I'm not mistaken. Here's the commit-diff:

https://sourceforge.net/p/zsh/code/ci/07478c6bc3a6fae465a5555ca12b22dc607dae31/

> - When ready, someone can hit "delete" on the Cvs tool (on the admin page)

Can't find that. I probably don't have the required access. I'm sure
someone who can do this, will.

> -- this won't delete the cvs, but will remove it from the headings.
> - We may want to rename the zsh dir in the cvs checkout too, similar to the
> git rename.
> - If everything is ok, we could go ahead and delete the old-style git repos
> (the ones I just renamed).  We may want to leave the cvs repo around for a
> while.

Those probably require admin access, too.

> I'll leave the first 2 steps to others.  I'd be glad to do the other 2, as
> desired.

Thanks for starting this off!

Regards, Frank

Re: git updates stalled?

[Aaron Schrab]

At 22:27 +0200 03 Apr 2013, Frank Terbeck <ft@bewatermyfriend.org> wrote:
>Wayne Davison wrote:
>> - Someone needs to check-in Aaron's changes as the first git-specific
>> commit.
>
>I've done that. I think it was just this one change change in the end.
>I'm Cc:ing Aaron to make sure I'm not mistaken. Here's the commit-diff:
>
>https://sourceforge.net/p/zsh/code/ci/07478c6bc3a6fae465a5555ca12b22dc607dae31/

Yes, that commit has the complete change.  There had been a previous 
version for which I'd noted an suggested improvement, but that version 
incorporates that change.

Re: git updates stalled?

[Wayne Davison]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 991 bytes --]

On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Frank Terbeck <ft@bewatermyfriend.org>wrote:

> Note that for cloning via ssh, you need to supply your sourceforge
> username as well: ssh://<user-name-here>@git.code.sf.net/p/zsh/code


I have my username set for *.sf.net in my ~/.ssh/config file, so I never
think to mention that.  Using https:// would require a similar name@ prefix.

In a similar vein, here's a useful config tweak that combines the speed of
git:// pulls and the auth of ssh pushes -- edit the .git/config file inside
your checkout and add a "pushurl" line.  For instance, if you do the
initial checkout via "git://git.code.sf.net/p/zsh/code", edit .git/config,
find the "url = git://git.code.sf.net/p/zsh/code" line and add a new line
of "pushurl = ssh://USER@git.code.sf.net/p/zsh/code" right after it.

I went ahead and renamed the zsh dir in the cvs repo to
be zsh-OLD-DIR-USE-GIT so that people trying to use cvs will get some kind
of indication that things have changed.

..wayne..

Re: git updates stalled?

[Greg Klanderman]

>>>>> On April 3, 2013 Wayne Davison <wayned@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:

> I went ahead and renamed the zsh dir in the cvs repo to
> be zsh-OLD-DIR-USE-GIT so that people trying to use cvs will get some kind
> of indication that things have changed.

Really?  Then why can I still do cvs log, diff, etc?

(I was going to request simply making the cvs repository read-only, as
really want to be able to do cvs diff for migrating my checkouts to git)

Greg

Re: git updates stalled?

[Wayne Davison]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 280 bytes --]

On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 3:56 PM, Greg Klanderman <gak@klanderman.net> wrote:

> Really?  Then why can I still do cvs log, diff, etc?
>

You must have had a checkout of the pserver version (which lags behind the
read/write version sometimes).  They are both changed now.

..wayne..

Re: git updates stalled?

[Peter Stephenson]

On Wed, 03 Apr 2013 11:05:16 -0700
Wayne Davison <wayned@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> We may as well pull the trigger now.

Thanks, very smooth so far.

> - When ready, someone can hit "delete" on the Cvs tool (on the admin page)
> -- this won't delete the cvs, but will remove it from the headings.

It's telling me this is non-reversible... I'll wait for a few git
commits first, but it's just paranoia.

pws

Re: git updates stalled?

[Greg Klanderman]

>>>>> On April 4, 2013 Wayne Davison <wayned@users.sourceforge.net> wrote:

> You must have had a checkout of the pserver version (which lags behind the
> read/write version sometimes).  They are both changed now.

Yep, that explains it.. thanks!  And in the meantime I was able to run
cvs diff on all my checkouts so I should be able to transition easily.

Greg

Re: git updates stalled?

[Peter Stephenson]

On Thu, 04 Apr 2013 09:48:52 +0100
Peter Stephenson <p.stephenson@samsung.com> wrote:
> > - When ready, someone can hit "delete" on the Cvs tool (on the admin page)
> > -- this won't delete the cvs, but will remove it from the headings.
> 
> It's telling me this is non-reversible... I'll wait for a few git
> commits first, but it's just paranoia.

All seems to working fine, so I've now done this; you won't see CVS
listed on the Sourceforge pages any more.

pws