[Project_owners] Project_owners Digest, Vol 58, Issue 4

Bobby S bobbys at gmail.com
Fri Apr 4 14:11:45 PDT 2008


unsubscribe

On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 3:00 PM,  <project_owners-request at mozdev.org> wrote:
> Send Project_owners mailing list submissions to
>         project_owners at mozdev.org
>
>  To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         https://www.mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/project_owners
>  or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         project_owners-request at mozdev.org
>
>  You can reach the person managing the list at
>         project_owners-owner at mozdev.org
>
>  When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>  than "Re: Contents of Project_owners digest..."
>
>
>  Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: proposed changes to Mozdev roadmap (Pete Collins)
>    2. Re: proposed changes to Mozdev roadmap (Arturo 'Buanzo' Busleiman)
>    3. Re: proposed changes to Mozdev roadmap (Myk Melez)
>    4. Re: proposed changes to Mozdev roadmap (Myk Melez)
>    5. Re: proposed changes to Mozdev roadmap (Myk Melez)
>    6. Re: proposed changes to Mozdev roadmap (Axel Hecht)
>
>
>  ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>  Message: 1
>  Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2008 13:00:17 -0700
>  From: Pete Collins <pete at mozdevgroup.com>
>  Subject: Re: [Project_owners] proposed changes to Mozdev roadmap
>  To: Mozdev Project Owners List <project_owners at mozdev.org>
>  Message-ID: <47F3E5D1.1020906 at mozdevgroup.com>
>  Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>
>  > * By "deprecating CVS", I assume we mean new projects should not be
>  > instituted on CVS unless the project owner explicitly requests it.
>  > I'd be in favor of that.  CVS is just too much pain compared to more
>  > modern systems.
>
>  It's funny, I've been using cvs for over a decade now and never noticed
>  any real problems w/ it ...
>
>  But I'm all for a better and easier to use revision control system is
>  there is one.
>
>  --pete
>
>  --
>  Pete Collins - Founder, Mozdev Group Inc.
>  www.mozdevgroup.com
>  Mozilla Software Development Solutions
>  tel: 1-719-302-5811
>  fax: 1-719-302-5813
>
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
>  Message: 2
>  Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2008 17:06:33 -0300
>  From: Arturo 'Buanzo' Busleiman <buanzo at buanzo.com.ar>
>  Subject: Re: [Project_owners] proposed changes to Mozdev roadmap
>  To: Mozdev Project Owners List <project_owners at mozdev.org>
>  Message-ID: <47F3E749.10101 at buanzo.com.ar>
>  Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>  Hash: SHA512
>
>  Pete Collins wrote:
>  | It's funny, I've been using cvs for over a decade now and never noticed
>  | any real problems w/ it ...
>
>  It all comes down to your needs. When I work by myself, I prefer CVS. When working with a team, SVN.
>  Yeah, I know both should do well in the team area, but... I've had enough problems with CVS :P
>
>  | But I'm all for a better and easier to use revision control system is
>  | there is one.
>
>  Subversion is quite good, really. For anyone interested, here you have a quite nice "CVS vs.
>  Subversion" comparison:
>
>  http://www.pushok.com/soft_svn_vscvs.php
>
>  A couple of interesting pages, with different perspectives:
>
>  http://wiki.scummvm.org/index.php/CVS_vs_SVN
>  http://weblogs.asp.net/astopford/archive/2004/11/05/253029.aspx
>
>  - --
>  Arturo "Buanzo" Busleiman
>  Reliable inter-continental Mail Relay Service - Ask me!
>  Independent Security Consultant - SANS - OISSG
>  http://www.buanzo.com.ar/pro/
>  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>  Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
>  Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
>  iD8DBQFH8+dIAlpOsGhXcE0RCgrjAJ0SDSQ+Ov90+7+YHyDqQ2R7Me0DDwCdGLMv
>  hog1XUuPSTaPqsjFUScUmOI=
>  =Aw2U
>  -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
>  Message: 3
>  Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2008 09:17:14 -0700
>  From: Myk Melez <myk at mozilla.org>
>  Subject: Re: [Project_owners] proposed changes to Mozdev roadmap
>  To: Mozdev Project Owners List <project_owners at mozdev.org>
>  Message-ID: <47F5030A.3020304 at mozilla.org>
>  Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>  Jesper Staun Hansen wrote:
>  >  > 3. Automate project creation and management so that project creation
>  > requests can be addressed in minutes or hours and users can self-manage
>  > their projects.*
>  >
>  > What's the rush? And it's already on the roadmap.
>  >
>  It's already on the roadmap, but it's currently listed as a second-tier
>  priority.  My proposal is to make it a top priority.  The "rush" is that
>  I think it's a key issue affecting Mozdev's attractiveness to potential
>  project owners who want to get up and running quickly.  It also impacts
>  existing project owners who want to get a new project up with a minimum
>  of fuss and delay.
>
>  -myk
>
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
>  Message: 4
>  Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2008 09:21:52 -0700
>  From: Myk Melez <myk at mozilla.org>
>  Subject: Re: [Project_owners] proposed changes to Mozdev roadmap
>  To: Mozdev Project Owners List <project_owners at mozdev.org>
>  Message-ID: <47F50420.1040707 at mozilla.org>
>  Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>  Pete Collins wrote:
>  > For security reasons, I would advise against this. Uploads are safer
>  > using version control and or browser file upload.
>  >
>  Mozilla IT has been deploying a new secure file upload and management
>  strategy for stage.mozilla.org that we could probably reuse.
>
>  I agree that version control is safer, because it's easier to correct
>  mistakes, but direct file manipulation is simpler and an oft-requested
>  feature (and for folks who want the safety, it's pretty easy to check
>  the files into version control as well).
>
>  Browser file upload is a good idea that we should implement as a
>  super-simple basic file upload solution whether or not we also enable
>  scp/sftp/ftps upload.
>
>  -myk
>
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
>  Message: 5
>  Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2008 09:29:14 -0700
>  From: Myk Melez <myk at mozilla.org>
>  Subject: Re: [Project_owners] proposed changes to Mozdev roadmap
>  To: Mozdev Project Owners List <project_owners at mozdev.org>
>  Message-ID: <47F505DA.5090603 at mozilla.org>
>  Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>  Alex Vincent wrote:
>  > * Not having Mercurial as part of the current MozillaBuild package
>  > hurts on Windows.  A lot.  Guess what my primary platform is...
>  Hmm, this seems like something the Mozilla folks would be working on.
>  Is there a bug on this?
>
>  > * If Mozilla 1.9.x will also have a constantly-maintained Mercurial
>  > repository, then it might actually be better for me to use Mercurial
>  > directly,
>  That's the plan.
>
>  > although I'm not sure mozdev would appreciate me placing the whole
>  > Mozilla source there... alternatively, I can always maintain a patch
>  > set, and make checking out of Moz1.9 part of the checkout process.
>  > (This alternate is how I was approaching my project on the assumption
>  > of SVN.)
>  I guess that depends on the size of the repository and the number of
>  projects that want this.
>
>  > * By "deprecating CVS", I assume we mean new projects should not be
>  > instituted on CVS unless the project owner explicitly requests it.
>  > I'd be in favor of that.  CVS is just too much pain compared to more
>  > modern systems.
>  Right.  We'd still provide CVS to projects that have good cause to use
>  it, but we'd encourage projects to use the other revision control system
>  instead, and that's where we would refocus tooling efforts (like the
>  various roadmap items on CVS tooling: Bonsai, LXR, Doctor, commit
>  notifications).
>
>  -myk
>
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
>  Message: 6
>  Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2008 18:26:44 +0200
>  From: Axel Hecht <axel at pike.org>
>  Subject: Re: [Project_owners] proposed changes to Mozdev roadmap
>  To: project_owners at mozdev.org
>  Message-ID: <ft30dg$h9t$1 at mozdev.mozdev.org>
>  Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>  Myk Melez wrote:
>  > Alex Vincent wrote:
>  >> * Not having Mercurial as part of the current MozillaBuild package
>  >> hurts on Windows.  A lot.  Guess what my primary platform is...
>  > Hmm, this seems like something the Mozilla folks would be working on.
>  > Is there a bug on this?
>
>  https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=402224
>
>  Axel
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  Project_owners mailing list
>  Project_owners at mozdev.org
>  https://www.mozdev.org/mailman/listinfo/project_owners
>
>
>  End of Project_owners Digest, Vol 58, Issue 4
>  *********************************************
>


More information about the Project_owners mailing list