From davidacoder at hotmail.com Wed Dec 4 04:26:13 2013 From: davidacoder at hotmail.com (davidacoder) Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2013 22:26:13 -0500 Subject: [Python.NET] github migration In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Every previous committer got back to me and agreed to be included in the git history with name and email, thanks to everyone! I now have an experimental git repo at https://github.com/pythonnet/pythonnet. PLEASE don't use that for anything real yet, I expect more rebases before the migration is done! I'll let everyone know when the repo is ready for real work. My current plan for next steps is this: 1. Please look at the repo and let me know if there are things you think went wrong in the migration. If you think it looks good, please also let us know 2. I've got one questions on the migration for the list (see below) please give feedback 3. Once we have sorted out anything that came up in 1 or 2, we should decide whether the migration should actually take place. My sense is that Brian and Barton should probably make that call, but hopefully everyone will just agree and we don't have to come up with some formal voting mechanism 4. If we decide to go with the migrated repo on github, I have a number of very smallish things I want to do (add things like .gitignore etc) 5. We declare it the new home and people can start submitting pull requests :) The main question I have is what to do about the branch clr-2.0-python-2.5-branch that you can see on github. That branch existed at some point in the svn repo (not anymore). It now has no parent and is not merged in the git repo, i.e. it is entirely independent of anything else. I believe the content of that branch was merged back into the main line way, way back and then this branch was deleted in svn, but that merge is not recorded as such in the git history. My sense is we should just delete the branch in the git repo, mainly because I think the content is already in the main line. But it does mean that we would lose the individual commits in that branch. Any thoughts? What follows below is a detailed description of what I did for the migration, feel free to ignore. - I started with the instructions here http://stackoverflow.com/a/3972103. You can look at the repo that I got from that step at https://github.com/pythonnet/pythonnet-rawsvnmig - I deleted the branches clr-2.0-python-2.5-branch at 11 , clr-2.0-python-2.5-branch at 12 and clr-2.0-python-2.5-branch at 42 , they weren't heads of anything and clearly just a migration artifact - I deleted the branch barton-work-branch: it was empty - I deleted the start tag and jrandom branch, they were clearly some initial irrelevant experiments uncovered from git svn clone - I deleted the Pythonnet-1_0-branch branch, it also seemed a dead end with nothing on it, i.e. the real 1.0 work was on 1.0-branch - The 1.0-branch had an unnecessary (empty) merge, I did a rebase that made that part of the history cleaner without loss of any info - The Brian-work-branch had been merged into the main line in such a way that git would have fast-forwarded that. I did a rebase of the trunk for that part, so that the individual commits are just in the history of trunk and then deleted the now obsolete Brian-work-branch branch - I renamed the trunk branch to develop (a la git flow) - I renamed the 1.0-branch to release-1.0 (again a la git flow convention) - I tagged the 1.0 release - I set the master branch to point to the 1.0 tag (assuming that the 1.0 release is the last officially released version, again a la git flow convention) - The rebases had added my name to every commit as the committer (but of course left the author field intact), I ran a script that equaled the committer to the author for every commit. Long story short: the history looks like it should without my name anywhere - I created https://github.com/pythonnet/pythonnet.github.io that has the documentation and updated the links in it, so that http://pythonnet.github.io works And feedback welcome! Cheers, David From: PythonDotNet [mailto:pythondotnet-bounces+davidacoder=hotmail.com at python.org] On Behalf Of davidacoder Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2013 2:13 PM To: pythondotnet at python.org Subject: Re: [Python.NET] github migration I'm trying to create an as pretty history conversion as possible. Ideally I want to convert the user names in the svn history to the standard git format of "Firstname Lastname ". To that extend I've contacted all the people that have ever committed to the svn repo to ask for their permission to include their email address in the new git history. My current plan is to wait a couple of days to see who responds. If I don't get a respond, I intend to just use the "svnusername " for those people. I also created another repo that can host the homepage for the project, so that http://pythonnet.github.io works. So, nothing will happen for a couple of days until I hear back from previous contributors, and then I'll update you all again. Best, David From: PythonDotNet [mailto:pythondotnet-bounces+davidacoder=hotmail.com at python.org] On Behalf Of davidacoder Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2013 9:07 AM To: 'Tony Roberts'; pythondotnet at python.org Subject: [Python.NET] github migration Alright, I started this now. I created the github organization and the repo. I will also have a stab at migrating the svn history. I've marked the github repo as experimental for now so that it is clear that at this point it is not the official source (yet). I'll keep the list updated as I make progress. Cheers, David From: PythonDotNet [mailto:pythondotnet-bounces+davidacoder=hotmail.com at python.org] On Behalf Of Tony Roberts Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2013 6:04 AM To: pythondotnet at python.org Subject: Re: [Python.NET] PTVS and python.NET Hi David, that would seem to fit with the way most other projects work, and should make it easier for anyone looking for the project on github to find it. I'm happy to help out with the migration and maintenance if it is decided to go ahead with this. The fork I created doesn't have the history from svn, so I think it would be better to start again with the sourceforge project and pull it into git with all the history and then merge in the various changes already in github. cheers, Tony On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 3:21 AM, davidacoder > wrote: I guess my preferred option would be to create a github organization and host the repo there. So something like github.com/pythonnet/pythonnet . In that case the organization can have multiple owners, so the whole thing is also less dependent on one person. If, on the other hand, one of the original maintainers wanted to host it under their account, I would also understand that, i.e. if this is really someone's baby. Finally, I guess the official short name is "pythonnet", right? Or "pythondotnet", like the mailing list alias? Cheers, David From: Tribble, Brett [mailto:btribble at ea.com ] Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2013 5:36 PM To: davidacoder; pythondotnet at python.org ; brian.lloyd at revolution.com Subject: RE: [Python.NET] PTVS and python.NET So, who is willing to be the primary maintainer of the github repository? I think we should wait for a little while to see if Brian or Barton respond. I see that tiran has a github account as well: https://github.com/tiran From: PythonDotNet [mailto:pythondotnet-bounces+btribble=ea.com at python.org] On Behalf Of davidacoder Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2013 6:37 AM To: pythondotnet at python.org Subject: Re: [Python.NET] PTVS and python.NET Great idea! Best, David From: PythonDotNet [mailto:pythondotnet-bounces+davidacoder=hotmail.com at python.org] On Behalf Of John Gill Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2013 7:47 AM To: pythondotnet at python.org Subject: [Python.NET] PTVS and python.NET Related to a move to github, I have been in touch with the maintainer of PTVS asking if they are aware of this project. It seems such a natural fit. He would be happy to: 1. Put a link on our "Related projects" page 2. Identify some interesting scenarios and do a blog post 3. Add a dedicated doc page 4. Etc. Subject to: 1. The project is actively maintained 2. Up to date docs 3. It "works" a. Reliable & robust b. Works with PTVS (eg PTVS doesn't crash, .) It would be great if PTVS was able to install python .NET for people (the current install process "copy these dll's" is simple and effective, but a direct install from PTVS would be good. I think we would need to resolve the current situation with the code split between github and sourceforge before we could get the endorsement from PTVS. John This communication and any attachments contain information which is confidential and may also be legally privileged. It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any form of disclosure, distribution, copying, printing or use of this communication or the information in it or in any attachments is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please return it with the title "received in error" to postmaster at tokiomillennium.com and then permanently delete the email and any attachments from your system. E-mail communications cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error free, as information could be intercepted, corrupted, amended, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. It is the recipient's responsibility to ensure that e-mail transmissions and any attachments are virus free. We do not accept liability for any damages or other consequences caused by information that is intercepted, corrupted, amended, lost, destroyed, arrives late or incomplete or contains viruses. ****************************************** _________________________________________________ Python.NET mailing list - PythonDotNet at python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythondotnet -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidacoder at hotmail.com Wed Dec 4 15:39:23 2013 From: davidacoder at hotmail.com (davidacoder) Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 09:39:23 -0500 Subject: [Python.NET] github migration In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: [I sent this yesterday already to the list but it looks like it didn't go through, sorry if this is now the second mail...] Every previous committer got back to me and agreed to be included in the git history with name and email, thanks to everyone! I now have an experimental git repo at https://github.com/pythonnet/pythonnet. PLEASE don?t use that for anything real yet, I expect more rebases before the migration is done! I?ll let everyone know when the repo is ready for real work. My current plan for next steps is this: 1. Please look at the repo and let me know if there are things you think went wrong in the migration. If you think it looks good, please also let us know 2. I?ve got one question on the migration for the list (see below) please give feedback 3. Once we have sorted out anything that came up in 1 or 2, we should decide whether the migration should actually take place. My sense is that Brian and Barton should probably make that call, but hopefully everyone will just agree and we don?t have to come up with some formal voting mechanism 4. If we decide to go with the migrated repo on github, I have a number of very smallish things I want to do (add things like .gitignore, readme etc) 5. We declare it the new home and people can start submitting pull requests :) The main question I have is what to do about the branch clr-2.0-python-2.5-branch that you can see on github. That branch existed at some point in the svn repo (not anymore). It now has no parent and is not merged in the git repo, i.e. it is entirely independent of anything else. I believe the content of that branch was merged back into the main line way, way back and then this branch was deleted in svn, but that merge is not recorded as such in the git history. My sense is we should just delete the branch in the git repo, mainly because I think the content is already in the main line. But it does mean that we would lose the individual commits in that branch. Any thoughts? What follows below is a detailed description of what I did for the migration, feel free to ignore. - I started with the instructions here http://stackoverflow.com/a/3972103. You can look at the repo that I got from that step at https://github.com/pythonnet/pythonnet-rawsvnmig - I deleted the branches clr-2.0-python-2.5-branch at 11, clr-2.0-python-2.5-branch at 12 and clr-2.0-python-2.5-branch at 42, they weren?t heads of anything and clearly just a migration artifact - I deleted the branch barton-work-branch: it was empty - I deleted the start tag and jrandom branch, they were clearly some initial irrelevant experiments uncovered from git svn clone - I deleted the Pythonnet-1_0-branch branch, it also seemed a dead end with nothing on it, i.e. the real 1.0 work was on 1.0-branch - The 1.0-branch had an unnecessary (empty) merge, I did a rebase that made that part of the history cleaner without loss of any info - The Brian-work-branch had been merged into the main line in such a way that git would have fast-forwarded that. I did a rebase of the trunk for that part, so that the individual commits are just in the history of trunk and then deleted the now obsolete Brian-work-branch branch - I renamed the trunk branch to develop (a la git flow) - I renamed the 1.0-branch to release-1.0 (again a la git flow convention) - I tagged the 1.0 release - I set the master branch to point to the 1.0 tag (assuming that the 1.0 release is the last officially released version, again a la git flow convention) - The rebases had added my name to every commit as the committer (but of course left the author field intact), I ran a script that equaled the committer to the author for every commit. Long story short: the history looks like it should without my name anywhere - I created https://github.com/pythonnet/pythonnet.github.io that has the documentation and updated the links in it, so that http://pythonnet.github.io works Any feedback welcome! Cheers, David From: PythonDotNet [mailto:pythondotnet-bounces+davidacoder=hotmail.com at python.org] On Behalf Of davidacoder Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2013 2:13 PM To: pythondotnet at python.org Subject: Re: [Python.NET] github migration I?m trying to create an as pretty history conversion as possible. Ideally I want to convert the user names in the svn history to the standard git format of ?Firstname Lastname ?. To that extend I?ve contacted all the people that have ever committed to the svn repo to ask for their permission to include their email address in the new git history. My current plan is to wait a couple of days to see who responds. If I don?t get a respond, I intend to just use the ?svnusername ? for those people. I also created another repo that can host the homepage for the project, so that http://pythonnet.github.io works. So, nothing will happen for a couple of days until I hear back from previous contributors, and then I?ll update you all again. Best, David From: PythonDotNet [mailto:pythondotnet-bounces+davidacoder=hotmail.com at python.org] On Behalf Of davidacoder Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2013 2:13 PM To: pythondotnet at python.org Subject: Re: [Python.NET] github migration I?m trying to create an as pretty history conversion as possible. Ideally I want to convert the user names in the svn history to the standard git format of ?Firstname Lastname ?. To that extend I?ve contacted all the people that have ever committed to the svn repo to ask for their permission to include their email address in the new git history. My current plan is to wait a couple of days to see who responds. If I don?t get a respond, I intend to just use the ?svnusername ? for those people. I also created another repo that can host the homepage for the project, so that http://pythonnet.github.io works. So, nothing will happen for a couple of days until I hear back from previous contributors, and then I?ll update you all again. Best, David From: PythonDotNet [mailto:pythondotnet-bounces+davidacoder=hotmail.com at python.org] On Behalf Of davidacoder Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2013 9:07 AM To: 'Tony Roberts'; pythondotnet at python.org Subject: [Python.NET] github migration Alright, I started this now. I created the github organization and the repo. I will also have a stab at migrating the svn history. I?ve marked the github repo as experimental for now so that it is clear that at this point it is not the official source (yet). I?ll keep the list updated as I make progress. Cheers, David From: PythonDotNet [mailto:pythondotnet-bounces+davidacoder=hotmail.com at python.org] On Behalf Of Tony Roberts Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2013 6:04 AM To: pythondotnet at python.org Subject: Re: [Python.NET] PTVS and python.NET Hi David, that would seem to fit with the way most other projects work, and should make it easier for anyone looking for the project on github to find it. I'm happy to help out with the migration and maintenance if it is decided to go ahead with this. The fork I created doesn't have the history from svn, so I think it would be better to start again with the sourceforge project and pull it into git with all the history and then merge in the various changes already in github. cheers, Tony On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 3:21 AM, davidacoder wrote: I guess my preferred option would be to create a github organization and host the repo there. So something like github.com/pythonnet/pythonnet. In that case the organization can have multiple owners, so the whole thing is also less dependent on one person. ? If, on the other hand, one of the original maintainers wanted to host it under their account, I would also understand that, i.e. if this is really someone?s baby. ? Finally, I guess the official short name is ?pythonnet?, right? Or ?pythondotnet?, like the mailing list alias? ? Cheers, David ? From: Tribble, Brett [mailto:btribble at ea.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2013 5:36 PM To: davidacoder; pythondotnet at python.org; brian.lloyd at revolution.com Subject: RE: [Python.NET] PTVS and python.NET ? So, who is willing to be the primary maintainer of the github repository? I think we should wait for a little while to see if Brian or Barton respond. I see that tiran has a github account as well: https://github.com/tiran ? From: PythonDotNet [mailto:pythondotnet-bounces+btribble=ea.com at python.org] On Behalf Of davidacoder Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2013 6:37 AM To: pythondotnet at python.org Subject: Re: [Python.NET] PTVS and python.NET ? Great idea! ? Best, David ? From: PythonDotNet [mailto:pythondotnet-bounces+davidacoder=hotmail.com at python.org] On Behalf Of John Gill Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2013 7:47 AM To: pythondotnet at python.org Subject: [Python.NET] PTVS and python.NET ? Related to a move to github, I have been in touch with the maintainer of PTVS asking if they are aware of this project.? It seems such a natural fit. ? He would be happy to: ? 1.?????? Put a link on our ?Related projects? page 2.?????? Identify some interesting scenarios and do a blog post 3.?????? Add a dedicated doc page 4.?????? Etc. ? Subject to: ? 1.?????? The project is actively maintained 2.?????? Up to date docs 3.?????? It ?works? a.?????? Reliable & robust b.????? Works with PTVS (eg PTVS doesn?t crash, ) ? It would be great if PTVS was able to install python .NET for people (the current install process ?copy these dll?s? is simple and effective, but a direct install from PTVS would be good. ? I think we would need to resolve the current situation with the code split between github and sourceforge before we could get the endorsement from PTVS. ? John This communication and any attachments contain information which is confidential and may also be legally privileged. It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient(s) please note that any form of disclosure, distribution, copying, printing or use of this communication or the information in it or in any attachments is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please return it with the title "received in error" to postmaster at tokiomillennium.com and then permanently delete the email and any attachments from your system. ? E-mail communications cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error free, as information could be intercepted, corrupted, amended, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. It is the recipient's responsibility to ensure that e-mail transmissions and any attachments are virus free. We do not accept liability for any damages or other consequences caused by information that is intercepted, corrupted, amended, lost, destroyed, arrives late or incomplete or contains viruses. ****************************************** _________________________________________________ Python.NET mailing list - PythonDotNet at python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythondotnet From davidacoder at hotmail.com Wed Dec 4 15:45:17 2013 From: davidacoder at hotmail.com (davidacoder) Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 09:45:17 -0500 Subject: [Python.NET] Branching scheme Message-ID: Hi everyone, if we do migrate to git, we should have a branching scheme for the project. I would suggest we just go with git flow (http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/). It is widely used, well documented, lots of people are familiar with it and we don't have to come up with our own rules or patterns. I expect that we probably won't be using the hotfix stuff much, if at all. The feature branches would simply be the pull requests of everyone against the develop branch. Whoever manages releases (and I would volunteer for that for a while) would have to follow the release branch stuff, but that also is not too involved. Any thoughts? Best, David From davidacoder at hotmail.com Wed Dec 4 15:54:45 2013 From: davidacoder at hotmail.com (davidacoder) Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 09:54:45 -0500 Subject: [Python.NET] Release plan Message-ID: Hi everyone, I'm trying to understand what the "official" release history is right now. PythonNet 2.0 was never officially released, correct? Was the last release 2.0 beta? In any case, I think it would be great if we released an official 2.0 version, provided binaries for download etc. My gut sense is that there would be significant benefits of releasing the current version + any major bug fixes as is, i.e. hold off from adding any new features. The current version seems to be used by a fair number of people and useful to them, and I think it would be good to have something officially released as quickly as possible. But, I don't know the codebase nor history well, so please chime in if you think that is a silly suggestion. Version 2.1 then could incorporate the various work people have done on forks of the project and maybe get setup.py to work on all supported platforms. We could also clean up some of the old files, docs etc for that release. In my mind such versions 2.0 and 2.1 could happen relatively quickly, i.e. don't be multi months projects but more like a few weeks at most. In general I think once we get setup/deployment via pip running, it would make sense to release new versions fairly frequently, even if they only add a few new features. Any thoughts? Best, David From brad at fie.us Wed Dec 4 19:18:11 2013 From: brad at fie.us (Brad Friedman) Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 13:18:11 -0500 Subject: [Python.NET] Release plan In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <943578B1-D650-4D62-8C01-9615BB5D9FA4@fie.us> It's not stable enough to do point release systems. No formal system for stable branch vs dev branch. No central design control. No branch or release maintainers. Need to get people and time and responsibilities set before you can do that. Best to focus on migration to github first. At least then you have tools for branching and merging. Order can come later. > On Dec 4, 2013, at 9:54 AM, davidacoder wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > I'm trying to understand what the "official" release history is right now. > PythonNet 2.0 was never officially released, correct? Was the last release > 2.0 beta? > > In any case, I think it would be great if we released an official 2.0 > version, provided binaries for download etc. > > My gut sense is that there would be significant benefits of releasing the > current version + any major bug fixes as is, i.e. hold off from adding any > new features. The current version seems to be used by a fair number of > people and useful to them, and I think it would be good to have something > officially released as quickly as possible. But, I don't know the codebase > nor history well, so please chime in if you think that is a silly > suggestion. > > Version 2.1 then could incorporate the various work people have done on > forks of the project and maybe get setup.py to work on all supported > platforms. We could also clean up some of the old files, docs etc for that > release. > > In my mind such versions 2.0 and 2.1 could happen relatively quickly, i.e. > don't be multi months projects but more like a few weeks at most. In general > I think once we get setup/deployment via pip running, it would make sense to > release new versions fairly frequently, even if they only add a few new > features. > > Any thoughts? > > Best, > David > _________________________________________________ > Python.NET mailing list - PythonDotNet at python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythondotnet From davidacoder at hotmail.com Wed Dec 4 19:45:14 2013 From: davidacoder at hotmail.com (davidacoder) Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 13:45:14 -0500 Subject: [Python.NET] Release plan In-Reply-To: <943578B1-D650-4D62-8C01-9615BB5D9FA4@fie.us> References: <943578B1-D650-4D62-8C01-9615BB5D9FA4@fie.us> Message-ID: Oh yes, this would really only be feasible once things are on github, still thought we might start talking about it now and get people's opinion on how they would want things to be. I think the brunt of the migration to github is done (fingers crossed) and it is more about a decision at this point and then a few days of finalizing things. I think I am mainly fishing for opinions on what would still have to be done to release a new version. I know minimally fix the bug that prevents it from working on Win 8.1, but I am sure other people know other bugs as well. Cheers, David > -----Original Message----- > From: PythonDotNet [mailto:pythondotnet- > bounces+davidacoder=hotmail.com at python.org] On Behalf Of Brad > Friedman > Sent: Wednesday, December 4, 2013 1:18 PM > To: A list for users and developers of Python for .NET > Subject: Re: [Python.NET] Release plan > > It's not stable enough to do point release systems. No formal system for > stable branch vs dev branch. No central design control. No branch or release > maintainers. Need to get people and time and responsibilities set before you > can do that. Best to focus on migration to github first. At least then you have > tools for branching and merging. Order can come later. > > > On Dec 4, 2013, at 9:54 AM, davidacoder > wrote: > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > I'm trying to understand what the "official" release history is right now. > > PythonNet 2.0 was never officially released, correct? Was the last > > release > > 2.0 beta? > > > > In any case, I think it would be great if we released an official 2.0 > > version, provided binaries for download etc. > > > > My gut sense is that there would be significant benefits of releasing > > the current version + any major bug fixes as is, i.e. hold off from > > adding any new features. The current version seems to be used by a > > fair number of people and useful to them, and I think it would be good > > to have something officially released as quickly as possible. But, I > > don't know the codebase nor history well, so please chime in if you > > think that is a silly suggestion. > > > > Version 2.1 then could incorporate the various work people have done > > on forks of the project and maybe get setup.py to work on all > > supported platforms. We could also clean up some of the old files, > > docs etc for that release. > > > > In my mind such versions 2.0 and 2.1 could happen relatively quickly, i.e. > > don't be multi months projects but more like a few weeks at most. In > > general I think once we get setup/deployment via pip running, it would > > make sense to release new versions fairly frequently, even if they > > only add a few new features. > > > > Any thoughts? > > > > Best, > > David > > _________________________________________________ > > Python.NET mailing list - PythonDotNet at python.org > > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythondotnet > _________________________________________________ > Python.NET mailing list - PythonDotNet at python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythondotnet From zane.purvis at gmail.com Thu Dec 5 17:34:03 2013 From: zane.purvis at gmail.com (Zane D. Purvis) Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2013 11:34:03 -0500 Subject: [Python.NET] Branching scheme In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I have found git-flow to be a good starting point for building a workflow. Cases it doesn't cover or parts of it that cause problems for the contributors of this project may be discovered, at which point deviation/modification should be considered. Are you suggesting using the gitflow project [ https://github.com/nvie/gitflow/wiki] to support the work flow, or just using the described branching scheme? On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 9:45 AM, davidacoder wrote: > Hi everyone, > > if we do migrate to git, we should have a branching scheme for the project. > I would suggest we just go with git flow > (http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/). It is widely > used, well documented, lots of people are familiar with it and we don't > have > to come up with our own rules or patterns. > > I expect that we probably won't be using the hotfix stuff much, if at all. > The feature branches would simply be the pull requests of everyone against > the develop branch. Whoever manages releases (and I would volunteer for > that > for a while) would have to follow the release branch stuff, but that also > is > not too involved. > > Any thoughts? > > Best, > David > _________________________________________________ > Python.NET mailing list - PythonDotNet at python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythondotnet > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davidacoder at hotmail.com Thu Dec 5 19:09:08 2013 From: davidacoder at hotmail.com (davidacoder) Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2013 13:09:08 -0500 Subject: [Python.NET] Branching scheme In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I think just using the branching scheme? For most people it would just boil down to that themain branch is called develop and that pull requests are made against that one, right? And if we do manage to do official releases we would know how to handle that in terms of branches. From: PythonDotNet [mailto:pythondotnet-bounces+davidacoder=hotmail.com at python.org] On Behalf Of Zane D. Purvis Sent: Thursday, December 5, 2013 11:34 AM To: A list for users and developers of Python for .NET Subject: Re: [Python.NET] Branching scheme I have found git-flow to be a good starting point for building a workflow. Cases it doesn't cover or parts of it that cause problems for the contributors of this project may be discovered, at which point deviation/modification should be considered. Are you suggesting using the gitflow project [https://github.com/nvie/gitflow/wiki] to support the work flow, or just using the described branching scheme? On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 9:45 AM, davidacoder > wrote: Hi everyone, if we do migrate to git, we should have a branching scheme for the project. I would suggest we just go with git flow (http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/). It is widely used, well documented, lots of people are familiar with it and we don't have to come up with our own rules or patterns. I expect that we probably won't be using the hotfix stuff much, if at all. The feature branches would simply be the pull requests of everyone against the develop branch. Whoever manages releases (and I would volunteer for that for a while) would have to follow the release branch stuff, but that also is not too involved. Any thoughts? Best, David _________________________________________________ Python.NET mailing list - PythonDotNet at python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pythondotnet -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stephen at granades.com Thu Dec 12 22:00:33 2013 From: stephen at granades.com (Stephen Granade) Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 15:00:33 -0600 Subject: [Python.NET] Making a true Python package out of Python for .NET Message-ID: For a project I'm working on, I'd like to put Python for .NET in a more standard Python package that lives in site-packages. However, the bootstrapping that happens in InitExt() in pythonengine.cs doesn't work in that case. If I put together a package that looks like: site-packages pythonnet __init__.py clr.pyd Python.Runtime.dll add "from pythonnet" to the lines that the nasty bootstrapping hack looks for in traceback, then when I call from pythonnet import clr Python goes into an infinite recursion loop. The import calls up initclr() in ClrModule.cs, which calls InitExt() in pythonengine.cs, which calls Python with the command "from pythonnet import clr", which calls initclr() in ClrModule.cs, which calls InitExt().... For whatever reason, this doesn't occur with a straight "import clr", if I dump clr.pyd and Python.Runtime.dll in my root site-packages directory. What's going on? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: