Hi all,
Due to a migration on Gitorious.org, some git repositories may not be
accessible. We're setting up a clone on github on this link:
If you want push access to these repositories, you can ask us to
become member of the 'Contributors' group.
Peter
PS: Someone (us?) created the 'Orocos' organisation on github 2 years
ago, which seems orphaned now.
Gitorious is down
On 11/27/2012 02:56 PM, Peter Soetens wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Due to a migration on Gitorious.org, some git repositories may not be
> accessible. We're setting up a clone on github on this link:
All repos were already back online at the time you send this email.
> https://github.com/OrocosDevs
>
> If you want push access to these repositories, you can ask us to
> become member of the 'Contributors' group.
>
> Peter
>
> PS: Someone (us?) created the 'Orocos' organisation on github 2 years
> ago, which seems orphaned now.
That was us and *please* don't do this. We have enough trouble already
doing shared development. Having two places were development takes place
won't make it better. Or we decide as a group to move to github, but
know that for sure Rock is not going to switch ... simply because I have
trouble already convincing people here that having both internal and
external repos is fine (they would prefer "everything internal" synced
to the external repos).
Gitorious is down
On 11/27/2012 02:56 PM, Peter Soetens wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Due to a migration on Gitorious.org, some git repositories may not be
> accessible. We're setting up a clone on github on this link:
All repos were already back online at the time you send this email.
> https://github.com/OrocosDevs
>
> If you want push access to these repositories, you can ask us to
> become member of the 'Contributors' group.
>
> Peter
>
> PS: Someone (us?) created the 'Orocos' organisation on github 2 years
> ago, which seems orphaned now.
That was us and *please* don't do this. We have enough trouble already
doing shared development. Having two places were development takes place
won't make it better. Or we decide as a group to move to github, but
know that for sure Rock is not going to switch ... simply because I have
trouble already convincing people here that having both internal and
external repos is fine (they would prefer "everything internal" synced
to the external repos).
Gitorious is down
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain [dot] joyeux [..] ...> wrote:
> On 11/27/2012 02:56 PM, Peter Soetens wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Due to a migration on Gitorious.org, some git repositories may not be
>> accessible. We're setting up a clone on github on this link:
>
> All repos were already back online at the time you send this email.
Yeah, it was close :-)
>
>> https://github.com/OrocosDevs
>>
>> If you want push access to these repositories, you can ask us to
>> become member of the 'Contributors' group.
>>
>> Peter
>>
>> PS: Someone (us?) created the 'Orocos' organisation on github 2 years
>> ago, which seems orphaned now.
>
> That was us and *please* don't do this. We have enough trouble already doing
> shared development. Having two places were development takes place won't
> make it better. Or we decide as a group to move to github, but know that for
> sure Rock is not going to switch ... simply because I have trouble already
> convincing people here that having both internal and external repos is fine
> (they would prefer "everything internal" synced to the external repos).
I understand, I'm not moving to github. I was setting up a backup
which we needed right now. I have renamed the project to
'orocos-toolchain' such that the URL scheme is compatible with
gitorious:
https://github.com/orocos-toolchain
Regarding your concerns: I'll setup a job to synchronise from
gitorious to github, and won't hand out push rights to anyone for
github (other than the owners) right now.
Peter
Gitorious is down
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain [dot] joyeux [..] ...> wrote:
> On 11/27/2012 02:56 PM, Peter Soetens wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Due to a migration on Gitorious.org, some git repositories may not be
>> accessible. We're setting up a clone on github on this link:
>
> All repos were already back online at the time you send this email.
Yeah, it was close :-)
>
>> https://github.com/OrocosDevs
>>
>> If you want push access to these repositories, you can ask us to
>> become member of the 'Contributors' group.
>>
>> Peter
>>
>> PS: Someone (us?) created the 'Orocos' organisation on github 2 years
>> ago, which seems orphaned now.
>
> That was us and *please* don't do this. We have enough trouble already doing
> shared development. Having two places were development takes place won't
> make it better. Or we decide as a group to move to github, but know that for
> sure Rock is not going to switch ... simply because I have trouble already
> convincing people here that having both internal and external repos is fine
> (they would prefer "everything internal" synced to the external repos).
I understand, I'm not moving to github. I was setting up a backup
which we needed right now. I have renamed the project to
'orocos-toolchain' such that the URL scheme is compatible with
gitorious:
https://github.com/orocos-toolchain
Regarding your concerns: I'll setup a job to synchronise from
gitorious to github, and won't hand out push rights to anyone for
github (other than the owners) right now.
Peter
Gitorious is down
On 11/27/2012 03:29 PM, Peter Soetens wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain [dot] joyeux [..] ...> wrote:
>> On 11/27/2012 02:56 PM, Peter Soetens wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Due to a migration on Gitorious.org, some git repositories may not be
>>> accessible. We're setting up a clone on github on this link:
>> All repos were already back online at the time you send this email.
> Yeah, it was close :-)
>
>>> https://github.com/OrocosDevs
>>>
>>> If you want push access to these repositories, you can ask us to
>>> become member of the 'Contributors' group.
>>>
>>> Peter
>>>
>>> PS: Someone (us?) created the 'Orocos' organisation on github 2 years
>>> ago, which seems orphaned now.
>> That was us and *please* don't do this. We have enough trouble already doing
>> shared development. Having two places were development takes place won't
>> make it better. Or we decide as a group to move to github, but know that for
>> sure Rock is not going to switch ... simply because I have trouble already
>> convincing people here that having both internal and external repos is fine
>> (they would prefer "everything internal" synced to the external repos).
> I understand, I'm not moving to github. I was setting up a backup
> which we needed right now. I have renamed the project to
> 'orocos-toolchain' such that the URL scheme is compatible with
> gitorious:
>
> https://github.com/orocos-toolchain
>
> Regarding your concerns: I'll setup a job to synchronise from
> gitorious to github, and won't hand out push rights to anyone for
> github (other than the owners) right now.
Fair enough ... I have to admit that I did not think about just removing
all push rights to get a pure readonly flow.
I would be interested to get the script (if possible) to do the same for
rock.
Gitorious is down
On 11/27/2012 03:29 PM, Peter Soetens wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain [dot] joyeux [..] ...> wrote:
>> On 11/27/2012 02:56 PM, Peter Soetens wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Due to a migration on Gitorious.org, some git repositories may not be
>>> accessible. We're setting up a clone on github on this link:
>> All repos were already back online at the time you send this email.
> Yeah, it was close :-)
>
>>> https://github.com/OrocosDevs
>>>
>>> If you want push access to these repositories, you can ask us to
>>> become member of the 'Contributors' group.
>>>
>>> Peter
>>>
>>> PS: Someone (us?) created the 'Orocos' organisation on github 2 years
>>> ago, which seems orphaned now.
>> That was us and *please* don't do this. We have enough trouble already doing
>> shared development. Having two places were development takes place won't
>> make it better. Or we decide as a group to move to github, but know that for
>> sure Rock is not going to switch ... simply because I have trouble already
>> convincing people here that having both internal and external repos is fine
>> (they would prefer "everything internal" synced to the external repos).
> I understand, I'm not moving to github. I was setting up a backup
> which we needed right now. I have renamed the project to
> 'orocos-toolchain' such that the URL scheme is compatible with
> gitorious:
>
> https://github.com/orocos-toolchain
>
> Regarding your concerns: I'll setup a job to synchronise from
> gitorious to github, and won't hand out push rights to anyone for
> github (other than the owners) right now.
Fair enough ... I have to admit that I did not think about just removing
all push rights to get a pure readonly flow.
I would be interested to get the script (if possible) to do the same for
rock.
Gitorious is down
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 3:33 PM, Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain [dot] joyeux [..] ...> wrote:
> On 11/27/2012 03:29 PM, Peter Soetens wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain [dot] joyeux [..] ...>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 11/27/2012 02:56 PM, Peter Soetens wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> Due to a migration on Gitorious.org, some git repositories may not be
>>>> accessible. We're setting up a clone on github on this link:
>>>
>>> All repos were already back online at the time you send this email.
>>
>> Yeah, it was close :-)
>>
>>>> https://github.com/OrocosDevs
>>>>
>>>> If you want push access to these repositories, you can ask us to
>>>> become member of the 'Contributors' group.
>>>>
>>>> Peter
>>>>
>>>> PS: Someone (us?) created the 'Orocos' organisation on github 2 years
>>>> ago, which seems orphaned now.
>>>
>>> That was us and *please* don't do this. We have enough trouble already
>>> doing
>>> shared development. Having two places were development takes place won't
>>> make it better. Or we decide as a group to move to github, but know that
>>> for
>>> sure Rock is not going to switch ... simply because I have trouble
>>> already
>>> convincing people here that having both internal and external repos is
>>> fine
>>> (they would prefer "everything internal" synced to the external repos).
>>
>> I understand, I'm not moving to github. I was setting up a backup
>> which we needed right now. I have renamed the project to
>> 'orocos-toolchain' such that the URL scheme is compatible with
>> gitorious:
>>
>> https://github.com/orocos-toolchain
>>
>> Regarding your concerns: I'll setup a job to synchronise from
>> gitorious to github, and won't hand out push rights to anyone for
>> github (other than the owners) right now.
>
> Fair enough ... I have to admit that I did not think about just removing all
> push rights to get a pure readonly flow.
>
> I would be interested to get the script (if possible) to do the same for
> rock.
curdir="$(pwd)"
for rep in rtt ocl typelib orogen utilmm utilrb rtt_typelib rtt_gems
autoproj build log4cpp orocos_toolchain; do
cd $rep.git || ( git clone --mirror
git://gitorious.org/orocos-toolchain/$rep.git && git remote add github
git [..] ...:orocos-toolchain/$rep.git && cd $rep.git)
git fetch && git push --mirror github
cd "$curdir"
done
I'm running this hourly. Please review since I'm not that familiar
with mirroring.
Peter
Gitorious is down
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 3:33 PM, Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain [dot] joyeux [..] ...> wrote:
> On 11/27/2012 03:29 PM, Peter Soetens wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain [dot] joyeux [..] ...>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 11/27/2012 02:56 PM, Peter Soetens wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> Due to a migration on Gitorious.org, some git repositories may not be
>>>> accessible. We're setting up a clone on github on this link:
>>>
>>> All repos were already back online at the time you send this email.
>>
>> Yeah, it was close :-)
>>
>>>> https://github.com/OrocosDevs
>>>>
>>>> If you want push access to these repositories, you can ask us to
>>>> become member of the 'Contributors' group.
>>>>
>>>> Peter
>>>>
>>>> PS: Someone (us?) created the 'Orocos' organisation on github 2 years
>>>> ago, which seems orphaned now.
>>>
>>> That was us and *please* don't do this. We have enough trouble already
>>> doing
>>> shared development. Having two places were development takes place won't
>>> make it better. Or we decide as a group to move to github, but know that
>>> for
>>> sure Rock is not going to switch ... simply because I have trouble
>>> already
>>> convincing people here that having both internal and external repos is
>>> fine
>>> (they would prefer "everything internal" synced to the external repos).
>>
>> I understand, I'm not moving to github. I was setting up a backup
>> which we needed right now. I have renamed the project to
>> 'orocos-toolchain' such that the URL scheme is compatible with
>> gitorious:
>>
>> https://github.com/orocos-toolchain
>>
>> Regarding your concerns: I'll setup a job to synchronise from
>> gitorious to github, and won't hand out push rights to anyone for
>> github (other than the owners) right now.
>
> Fair enough ... I have to admit that I did not think about just removing all
> push rights to get a pure readonly flow.
>
> I would be interested to get the script (if possible) to do the same for
> rock.
curdir="$(pwd)"
for rep in rtt ocl typelib orogen utilmm utilrb rtt_typelib rtt_gems
autoproj build log4cpp orocos_toolchain; do
cd $rep.git || ( git clone --mirror
git://gitorious.org/orocos-toolchain/$rep.git && git remote add github
git [..] ...:orocos-toolchain/$rep.git && cd $rep.git)
git fetch && git push --mirror github
cd "$curdir"
done
I'm running this hourly. Please review since I'm not that familiar
with mirroring.
Peter
Gitorious is down
As a user, I would absolutely support a migration to github.
gitorious.org is slow, unstable, and counter-intuitive in comparison;
it is not clear to me why it even exists.
Cheers,
Andrew
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Peter Soetens <peter [..] ...> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 3:33 PM, Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain [dot] joyeux [..] ...> wrote:
>> On 11/27/2012 03:29 PM, Peter Soetens wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain [dot] joyeux [..] ...>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 11/27/2012 02:56 PM, Peter Soetens wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Due to a migration on Gitorious.org, some git repositories may not be
>>>>> accessible. We're setting up a clone on github on this link:
>>>>
>>>> All repos were already back online at the time you send this email.
>>>
>>> Yeah, it was close :-)
>>>
>>>>> https://github.com/OrocosDevs
>>>>>
>>>>> If you want push access to these repositories, you can ask us to
>>>>> become member of the 'Contributors' group.
>>>>>
>>>>> Peter
>>>>>
>>>>> PS: Someone (us?) created the 'Orocos' organisation on github 2 years
>>>>> ago, which seems orphaned now.
>>>>
>>>> That was us and *please* don't do this. We have enough trouble already
>>>> doing
>>>> shared development. Having two places were development takes place won't
>>>> make it better. Or we decide as a group to move to github, but know that
>>>> for
>>>> sure Rock is not going to switch ... simply because I have trouble
>>>> already
>>>> convincing people here that having both internal and external repos is
>>>> fine
>>>> (they would prefer "everything internal" synced to the external repos).
>>>
>>> I understand, I'm not moving to github. I was setting up a backup
>>> which we needed right now. I have renamed the project to
>>> 'orocos-toolchain' such that the URL scheme is compatible with
>>> gitorious:
>>>
>>> https://github.com/orocos-toolchain
>>>
>>> Regarding your concerns: I'll setup a job to synchronise from
>>> gitorious to github, and won't hand out push rights to anyone for
>>> github (other than the owners) right now.
>>
>> Fair enough ... I have to admit that I did not think about just removing all
>> push rights to get a pure readonly flow.
>>
>> I would be interested to get the script (if possible) to do the same for
>> rock.
>
> curdir="$(pwd)"
> for rep in rtt ocl typelib orogen utilmm utilrb rtt_typelib rtt_gems
> autoproj build log4cpp orocos_toolchain; do
> cd $rep.git || ( git clone --mirror
> git://gitorious.org/orocos-toolchain/$rep.git && git remote add github
> git [..] ...:orocos-toolchain/$rep.git && cd $rep.git)
> git fetch && git push --mirror github
> cd "$curdir"
> done
>
> I'm running this hourly. Please review since I'm not that familiar
> with mirroring.
>
> Peter
> --
> Orocos-Users mailing list
> Orocos-Users [..] ...
> http://lists.mech.kuleuven.be/mailman/listinfo/orocos-users
Gitorious is down
On Nov 27, 2012, at 9:30 AM, Andrew Wagner wrote:
> As a user, I would absolutely support a migration to github.
> gitorious.org is slow, unstable, and counter-intuitive in comparison;
> it is not clear to me why it even exists.
>
> Cheers,
> Andrew
>
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Peter Soetens <peter [..] ...> wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 3:33 PM, Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain [dot] joyeux [..] ...> wrote:
>>> On 11/27/2012 03:29 PM, Peter Soetens wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Sylvain Joyeux <sylvain [dot] joyeux [..] ...>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 11/27/2012 02:56 PM, Peter Soetens wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Due to a migration on Gitorious.org, some git repositories may not be
>>>>>> accessible. We're setting up a clone on github on this link:
>>>>>
>>>>> All repos were already back online at the time you send this email.
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, it was close :-)
>>>>
>>>>>> https://github.com/OrocosDevs
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you want push access to these repositories, you can ask us to
>>>>>> become member of the 'Contributors' group.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Peter
>>>>>>
>>>>>> PS: Someone (us?) created the 'Orocos' organisation on github 2 years
>>>>>> ago, which seems orphaned now.
>>>>>
>>>>> That was us and *please* don't do this. We have enough trouble already
>>>>> doing
>>>>> shared development. Having two places were development takes place won't
>>>>> make it better. Or we decide as a group to move to github, but know that
>>>>> for
>>>>> sure Rock is not going to switch ... simply because I have trouble
>>>>> already
>>>>> convincing people here that having both internal and external repos is
>>>>> fine
>>>>> (they would prefer "everything internal" synced to the external repos).
>>>>
>>>> I understand, I'm not moving to github. I was setting up a backup
>>>> which we needed right now. I have renamed the project to
>>>> 'orocos-toolchain' such that the URL scheme is compatible with
>>>> gitorious:
>>>>
>>>> https://github.com/orocos-toolchain
>>>>
>>>> Regarding your concerns: I'll setup a job to synchronise from
>>>> gitorious to github, and won't hand out push rights to anyone for
>>>> github (other than the owners) right now.
>>>
>>> Fair enough ... I have to admit that I did not think about just removing all
>>> push rights to get a pure readonly flow.
>>>
>>> I would be interested to get the script (if possible) to do the same for
>>> rock.
>>
>> curdir="$(pwd)"
>> for rep in rtt ocl typelib orogen utilmm utilrb rtt_typelib rtt_gems
>> autoproj build log4cpp orocos_toolchain; do
>> cd $rep.git || ( git clone --mirror
>> git://gitorious.org/orocos-toolchain/$rep.git && git remote add github
>> git [..] ...:orocos-toolchain/$rep.git && cd $rep.git)
>> git fetch && git push --mirror github
>> cd "$curdir"
>> done
>>
>> I'm running this hourly. Please review since I'm not that familiar
>> with mirroring.
>>
>> Peter
>>
@Andrew
I think one of the primary reasons is cost, along with the open source nature of Gitorious. However, I agree that Gitorious.org is slow and flakey. Another option is BitBucket. It's price is much more appealing than GitHub (more often than not it's free), and it's pretty fully featured.
-dustin
Gitorious is down
We could also setup this mirror as an automatic fallback in autoproj ...
Gitorious is down
On 11/27/2012 03:37 PM, Sylvain Joyeux wrote:
> We could also setup this mirror as an automatic fallback in autoproj ...
>
I would not do that. That is asking for trouble if autoproj is falling
back to a different source in the middle of a bootstrap/update. You are
never sure if there might be inconsistencies between both sources (the
update script will run only once a day - I guess).
Alex