CVS ?

CVS ?

[Ollivier Robert]

Is there any progress on the Sourceforge front ? Or has anyone started
their own CVS repository ?

Will there be snapshots again ?

I know I appear to have only questions but it is the only way I could help
the developement of zsh (even if it is limited to try to run the
dev. versions due to time constraints...).
-- 
Ollivier ROBERT -=- Eurocontrol EEC/TEC -=- roberto@eurocontrol.fr
The Postman hits! The Postman hits! You have new mail.

Re: CVS ?

[Bart Schaefer]

On Mar 22,  3:09pm, Ollivier Robert wrote:
} Subject: CVS ?
}
} Is there any progress on the Sourceforge front ? Or has anyone started
} their own CVS repository ?

I thought Adam was waiting for a reply on whether sourceforge was willing
to host the sources under the zsh license.  Adam?

} Will there be snapshots again ?

PWS has indicated he'll be starting up again soon.  I sent him a list of
the patches since -dev-19 (up through article 10168) a couple days ago.

I'm now generally of the opinion that we should go ahead with sourceforge
if they're OK with the license; initialize it by grabbing Tanaka's CVSROOT
with cvsup and worry about the mailing lists later (probably, much later).
However, having waited this long, we might as well wait for PWS to give
his opinion.

-- 
Bart Schaefer                                 Brass Lantern Enterprises
http://www.well.com/user/barts              http://www.brasslantern.com

Re: CVS ?

[Adam Spiers]

Bart Schaefer (schaefer@candle.brasslantern.com) wrote:
> On Mar 22,  3:09pm, Ollivier Robert wrote:
> } Subject: CVS ?
> }
> } Is there any progress on the Sourceforge front ? Or has anyone started
> } their own CVS repository ?
> 
> I thought Adam was waiting for a reply on whether sourceforge was willing
> to host the sources under the zsh license.  Adam?

Still waiting :-(  I'll give them another gentle poke now ...

> } Will there be snapshots again ?
> 
> PWS has indicated he'll be starting up again soon.  I sent him a list of
> the patches since -dev-19 (up through article 10168) a couple days ago.
> 
> I'm now generally of the opinion that we should go ahead with sourceforge
> if they're OK with the license; initialize it by grabbing Tanaka's CVSROOT
> with cvsup and worry about the mailing lists later (probably, much later).

Except that his cvsupd stopped running a while ago, I think.  Not that
that's a problem; I'm probably not the only one with a mirror of it.

> However, having waited this long, we might as well wait for PWS to give
> his opinion.

Agreed.  He is the coordinator after all :-)

Adam -- very much looking forward to getting the latest code again
(haven't even got the wordcode stuff yet ...)

Re: CVS ?

[Tanaka Akira]

In article <20000322165611.A18419@thelonious.new.ox.ac.uk>,
  Adam Spiers <adam@spiers.net> writes:

> Except that his cvsupd stopped running a while ago, I think.  Not that
> that's a problem; I'm probably not the only one with a mirror of it.

CVSupd was stopped at 3/19 due to a power maintenance and I forgot to
restart that.  It should be working now.

Also, the repository is up-to-date: patches are applied upto 10218.
-- 
Tanaka Akira

Re: CVS ?

[Peter Stephenson]

"Bart Schaefer" wrote:
> I'm now generally of the opinion that we should go ahead with sourceforge
> if they're OK with the license; initialize it by grabbing Tanaka's CVSROOT
> with cvsup and worry about the mailing lists later (probably, much later).
> However, having waited this long, we might as well wait for PWS to give
> his opinion.

Sounds great.

I'm just getting up to date with the archive, and should have it ready by
the weekend, if it still compilers.  No problems with applying patches,
anyway, except for a few lines of offset in stuff from Sven: four lines in
compsys.yo and one in init.c, at least.

-- 
Peter Stephenson <pws@pwstephenson.fsnet.co.uk>