[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [Axiom-developer] Re: Guessing package, was: Re: your program / pape

From: Bill Page
Subject: RE: [Axiom-developer] Re: Guessing package, was: Re: your program / paper
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 15:16:27 -0400

On March 20, 2007 3:01 PM Alfredo Portes
> On 3/20/07, address@hidden <address@hidden> wrote:
> > Quoting Alfredo Portes <address@hidden>:
> >
> > > By the way, what should be done with address@hidden
> > > If we cannot keep it up to date, I think we should remove 
> > > it, especially now that the problems with sourceforge
> > > look like they have been solved.
> >
> > Ask for the nth times it to be reset to zero.
> > Then let the community decide which source is to be the basis
> > for future development.  Have everyone agrees on a roadmap to
> > be followed.
> >
> I can do that. But then we cannot duplicate a directory like 
> last time or we are going to have the disk space problem again.
> But should /trunk be removed first?

I think we should *first* merge build-improvements and wh-sandbox
to define a new "Silver" /trunk at SourceForge. Delete the old
/silver branch as SourceForge.

> If Bill agrees, I can ask Ben to repopulate like he did last
> time.

I don't think we can simply re-population with all the history
at SourceForge. The result would likely be too large again. I
would prefer to reset to 0 and then simply import the source
(minus the history) from the new "Silver" /trunk at SourceForge.

> > What? we did that last time it didn't work? Hmm, out of
> > idea :-(
> The nth time should be the lucky one. :-)

Yes, let's do it again.

Bill Page.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]