Feature #294

Migrate the Sylpheed repositoy to git

Added by Antonio Ospite over 1 year ago. Updated about 1 month ago.

Status:NewStart date:02/07/2018
Priority:LowDue date:
Assignee:Hiroyuki Yamamoto% Done:

0%

Category:SylpheedSpent time:-
Target version:-

Description

Hi,

IMVHO sylpheed could attract more contributors if it used git for source code management.

Of course it is possible to use git-svn as a workaround, but a native git repository has the benefit to record occasional contributors in a more transparent way.

I can help with the migration if there is interest.

Thank you,
Antonio

sylpheed-svn-to-git-conversion.sh Magnifier - svn-to-git conversion script (2.08 KB) Antonio Ospite, 07/10/2018 05:57 AM

History

#1 Updated by Antonio Ospite 11 months ago

Attaching a baseline script for a first rough conversion.

Let me know if anything should be added to it.

Thanks,
Antonio

#2 Updated by Antonio Ospite about 1 month ago

Ping.

#3 Updated by John Spencer about 1 month ago

yes, that would be highly appreciated. especially if this could move to git(hub|lab) etc so one can actually browse the code & commits in a browser, rather than having to install the antiquated SVN program to check out the source code and learn the commands to use it.

#4 Updated by John Spencer about 1 month ago

btw, there's already a git mirror https://github.com/jan0sch/sylpheed

so Hiroyuki would not even need to do any work apart from cloning the existing repo and push it to his own remote of choice.

#5 Updated by Antonio Ospite about 1 month ago

John Spencer wrote:

yes, that would be highly appreciated. especially if this could move to git(hub|lab) etc so one can actually browse the code & commits in a browser, rather than having to install the antiquated SVN program to check out the source code and learn the commands to use it.

In general, committing in the browser may work well for small docs fixes or for translations but for code you still want stuff compiled and tested locally before committing, so learning command line tools (either git or svn) is recommended if you want to work on the code.

John Spencer wrote:

btw, there's already a git mirror https://github.com/jan0sch/sylpheed

so Hiroyuki would not even need to do any work apart from cloning the existing repo and push it to his own remote of choice.

This is not so trivial because in an official git repository of sylpheed you want to preserve as much history as possible, as tags and branches, so some planning is still required, but yeah there are tools to automate most tasks.

Ciao,
Antonio

#6 Updated by John Spencer about 1 month ago

In general, committing in the browser may work well

no interest in that. i meant being able to browse the source tree and the commits (i.e. commit log)

This is not so trivial because in an official git repository of sylpheed you want to preserve as much history as possible, as tags and branches

the repo in question seems to have almost 2.7K commits, which seems complete to me. i'm aware that the branches are missing, but then, none of the branches in svn have been touched since 2006 and they seem to have been merged into master... uh, i mean into trunk.
in most repos i work with stale branches are nothing but a nuisance, and they're just still around because nobody made the effort to delete them. i have the impression the 2 or 3 branches i saw here are of that sort too.

#7 Updated by Antonio Ospite about 1 month ago

John Spencer wrote:

In general, committing in the browser may work well

no interest in that. i meant being able to browse the source tree and the commits (i.e. commit log)

Sorry, I misread your original message and got the '&' wrong, I now get what you meant and fully agree with that part.

This is not so trivial because in an official git repository of sylpheed you want to preserve as much history as possible, as tags and branches

the repo in question seems to have almost 2.7K commits, which seems complete to me. i'm aware that the branches are missing, but then, none of the branches in svn have been touched since 2006 and they seem to have been merged into master... uh, i mean into trunk.
in most repos i work with stale branches are nothing but a nuisance, and they're just still around because nobody made the effort to delete them. i have the impression the 2 or 3 branches i saw here are of that sort too.

For "topic" branches this holds, but "release" branches or tags can still be useful from an historic point of view.

However all these thoughts are not very productive if we don't know what Hirouky's opinion is. :)

Ciao,
Antonio

Also available in: Atom PDF