From: Jason van Zyl Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 23:16:01 GMT Subject: Re: [JGIT PATCH 1/9] mavenizing step 1: moved over the initial poms from Jasons branch Signed-off-by: Mark Struberg Message-ID: <7BE83B1E-200A-4E19-979D-7A53CE582468@sonatype.com> In-Reply-To: <949779.47404.qm@web27804.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> On 2009-09-30, at 4:13 PM, Mark Struberg wrote: > Hi! > > I now squashed all my changes into 2 commits and omitted the eclipse > parts. They are available at > > http://github.com/sonatype/JGit/commits/mavenize2 > > As Shawn pointed out on IRC, the next step would be to migrate this > patch over to the eclipe.org-post branch which I will do tomorrow > evening. > I also have a Tycho build for the EGIT part, and I have bundle creation working for the JGIT part. I've already integrated these two builds into our product so it all works. I can put it somewhere as you're ready to absorb it if you want it. > LieGrue, > strub > > --- On Wed, 9/30/09, Shawn O. Pearce wrote: > >> From: Shawn O. Pearce >> Subject: Re: [JGIT PATCH 1/9] mavenizing step 1: moved over the >> initial poms from Jasons branch Signed-off-by: Mark Struberg >> >> To: "Mark Struberg" >> Cc: "Jonas Fonseca" , "Robin Rosenberg" > >, git@vger.kernel.org, "Jason van Zyl" >> Date: Wednesday, September 30, 2009, 11:16 PM >> Mark Struberg >> wrote: >>>> From: Jonas Fonseca >>>> actually >>>> removes features (by not keeping the JGit >> specific >>>> settings), which >>>> you then try to amend later in the patch series. >>> >>> I'm not sure what JGit specific settings you speak >> about? >> >> I think he's talking about the Eclipse settings >> files? Or is it >> something else? >> >>>> In terms of making the patch series more >> manageable for >>>> you, I think >>>> the best approach is to start with the patches >> not relevant >>>> to the >>>> mavenizing (renaming PathSuffixTestCase). >>> >>> In fact the fix of the PathSuffixTestCase came a few >> days later >>> after I found the reason why I miss a few tests. This >> should be >>> fixed in the current master anyway and has not so much >> todo with >>> the mavenization itself. >> >> But it should be earlier in the series because its easier >> to apply. >> Use rebase -i to swap the order of the patches. >> >>> I had the following in mind: every single commit >> should be >>> compileable and working. So it's not easily >> manageable to move the >>> directory structure in one patch and apply all the >> changes into >>> the poms in another commit. >> >> Well, you need to edit the pom to change the source >> directory and do >> the move in one commit, and then edit the pom further in >> another, >> possibly removing the source directory directories once it >> is the >> standard maven layout. >> >>> We could for sure squash the later few commits, but I >> didn't >>> liked to rebase and push since there have been a few >> forks of the >>> mavenize branch and I hoped I could pull back a few >> commits from >>> others and later do a rebase -i. >> >> True. >> >> At this point we need to rebase the patches on the new >> history in >> the eclipse.org-post branch, which contains a massive >> rename of >> org.spearce to org.eclipse. That may make the tree >> reorg patch in >> your Maven series harder to bring over to the new history, >> sorry. >> >> Worse, we now have to start following the Eclipse IP >> process[1] >> for submissions to JGit... >> >> [1] http://www.eclipse.org/projects/dev_process/ip-process-in-cartoons.php >> >> -- >> Shawn. >> -- >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe >> git" in >> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >> > > > > Thanks, Jason ---------------------------------------------------------- Jason van Zyl Founder, Apache Maven http://twitter.com/jvanzyl ----------------------------------------------------------