[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-scm-interest
Subject:    Re: [Kde-scm-interest] Sysadmin advice regarding Monolithic vs
From:       Ian Monroe <ian () monroe ! nu>
Date:       2010-09-08 14:09:48
Message-ID: AANLkTinYxdqso1QhcspWufKngtoWpvb50zyOZxS1mUc+ () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 8:41 AM, Torgny Nyblom <kde@nyblom.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Sep 2010 08:26:46 -0500
> Ian Monroe <ian@monroe.nu> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 5:59 AM, Torgny Nyblom <kde@nyblom.org> wrote:
> [...]
>
>> > Why would this be easier? Use these rules in the above context but
>> > with a prefix if necessary.
>>
>> That doesn't work, I've tried and its a known thing.
>
> Weird guess my rules just isn't aware of this limitation since they
> handle it just fine :)
>
> KMail here started in kdenetwork in r211 and I can track history back
> there.

So you have a monolithic kdepim git repo and it has the full history
of kmail? That being possible is news to me. Glad to hear it though.
Certainly means that creating the rules file for monolithic repos
isn't less work then split repos, either way we have to track all the
project movement.

Ian
_______________________________________________
Kde-scm-interest mailing list
Kde-scm-interest@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-scm-interest
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]