- About Scala
- Documentation
- Code Examples
- Software
- Scala Developers
Re: Re: Scala Github repository is now live
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 9:59 PM, Daniel Spiewak wrote:
> Well we can't have that. :-) Just thought it was a valid question, since we all have to re-clone.
Nobody said it wasn't a valid question. We didn't do it lightly, but
fortunately we were able to do it on the same day.










Re: Re: Scala Github repository is now live
Except, you'll probably have conflicts there as well, depending on the patch. Note: the http://github.com/jsuereth/scala-repo-cleaner project has a filter-branch script you can run on your commits before rebasing that should line up whitespace and remove needless files from your repo before merging. I used it to help make migration easier (and to clean up the repository to begin with).
- Josh
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 1:57 PM, Daniel Spiewak <djspiewak [at] gmail [dot] com> wrote:
Re: Re: Scala Github repository is now live
This is actually what rebase is doing, except it's going to be smarter about things like whitespace and no-op commits. The above will work most of the time, but the conditions under which it works also allow rebase to work (and it's easier, and works under more conditions).
Daniel
Re: Re: Scala Github repository is now live
On 1 December 2011 20:00, Josh Suereth wrote:
> Another fall back for the lazy is "git diff master > patch.foo && git
> checkout new-master && git checkout -b new-branch && git apply patch.foo"
git format-patch and git am are better because they preserve commit
messsages, etc.
The easiest way to resolve conflicts is to just use git mergetool.
I think using format-patch, am and git mergetool is the easiest way to
migrate a small number of commits.
Re: Scala Github repository is now live
Hey folks! How do you feel about removing ".project" and putting it
under project.SAMPLE in the same fashion as it's done for
".classpath".
The motivation for that is that sometimes ".project" files are
volatile. For example, if I want to create custom filters in Eclipse
or want to disable Eclipse's Scala builder (and just use Ant), I need
to modify ".project". But I don't want to commit those changes in
order not to mess future pull requests into scala/scala. Also, I don't
want the ".project" file to show up as modified every time I do git
status or equivalent.
The non-invasive solution to the problem might is making Git oblivious
to the project file, but this doesn't work for me, since a record in
my .gitignore doesn't prevent ".project" from being flagged as
modified every time I want to commit. Your thoughts?
Re: Re: Scala Github repository is now live
On Thursday 01 December 2011 08:11:46 Eugene Burmako wrote:
> The non-invasive solution to the problem might is making Git oblivious
> to the project file, but this doesn't work for me, since a record in
> my .gitignore doesn't prevent ".project" from being flagged as
> modified every time I want to commit. Your thoughts?
If you want git to ignore a file that is part of the repository, then you can
use "git update-index --assume-unchanged ".
Cheers,
Mirko
Re: Re: Scala Github repository is now live
On 2011-12-01 17:11, Eugene Burmako wrote:
> Hey folks! How do you feel about removing ".project" and putting it
> under project.SAMPLE in the same fashion as it's done for
> ".classpath".
+1
> The motivation for that is that sometimes ".project" files are
> volatile. For example, if I want to create custom filters in Eclipse
> or want to disable Eclipse's Scala builder (and just use Ant), I need
> to modify ".project". But I don't want to commit those changes in
Note that you can create an Eclipse project (with all the meta-data
files) in a different location (e.g. the default workspace dir) and add
external ("linked") source folders that point to your working copy. (I
tried that today for working on the library but ran into a few issues
with the Scala editor and builder which may or may not be caused by this
setup. This needs some further investigation.)
-sz
Re: Re: Scala Github repository is now live
On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 8:11 AM, Eugene Burmako wrote:
> Hey folks! How do you feel about removing ".project" and putting it
> under project.SAMPLE in the same fashion as it's done for
> ".classpath".
Yes please.