From djberg96 at gmail.com  Sun Oct 18 09:53:55 2009
From: djberg96 at gmail.com (Daniel Berger)
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 07:53:55 -0600
Subject: [Win32utils-devel] Change to windows-api and other stuff
Message-ID: <6037b70c0910180653v1f4eb438j417229bf2e3fb7bf@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

I know it's been a little quiet lately. In part that's due to the fact
that I got myself a new job. It's a great job, but the commute is
long, and I've had to spend some of my weekend time getting up to
speed on some new technology, like git. Well, new to me anyway.

Anyway, just wanted to let you know that I've made a (hopefully) minor
change to windows-api, which I just released as 0.4.0. From now on,
any functions that begin with an underscore now retain that underscore
in the automatic method definitions, but with a non-underscore alias.
For example, instead of just "umask()", you'll now get "_umask()" and
"umask()" as an alias. I found that there were times when it was
better to retain the underscore in order to avoid certain method
conflicts.

Regards,

Dan

From djberg96 at gmail.com  Sun Oct 18 09:56:01 2009
From: djberg96 at gmail.com (Daniel Berger)
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 07:56:01 -0600
Subject: [Win32utils-devel] Git?
Message-ID: <6037b70c0910180656s6833bfb5oca4691bd7eedf832@mail.gmail.com>

Ok, so I've gone and learned git. Well, learned it well enough to get
by, anyway. I can pull and push with the best of 'em!

Are people on the list in favor of switching to git (on github)?
Opposed? Or indifferent?

I personally can live with CVS, but I realize git is quite popular,
and it might bring greater exposure to the project.

Thoughts?

- Dan

From luislavena at gmail.com  Sun Oct 18 10:40:47 2009
From: luislavena at gmail.com (Luis Lavena)
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 12:40:47 -0200
Subject: [Win32utils-devel] Git?
In-Reply-To: <6037b70c0910180656s6833bfb5oca4691bd7eedf832@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6037b70c0910180656s6833bfb5oca4691bd7eedf832@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <71166b3b0910180740i53e2a23did8f60652e73f0fb3@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 11:56 AM, Daniel Berger <djberg96 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Ok, so I've gone and learned git. Well, learned it well enough to get
> by, anyway. I can pull and push with the best of 'em!
>
> Are people on the list in favor of switching to git (on github)?
> Opposed? Or indifferent?
>

In favor here.

> I personally can live with CVS, but I realize git is quite popular,
> and it might bring greater exposure to the project.
>

CVS has keep me out of the loop to contribute to this project, mostly
because installing and setting CVS has been pushed out of my brain in
favor of Mercurial, Subversion, Bazaar and Git itself.

> Thoughts?
>

The repository conversion/relocation to GitHub will also increase the
contribution network, exposure and tools to manage these (Fork queue,
for example).

As example, a project that noones was going to work with
(RubyInstaller) got several contributions, forks and active patches,
bigger than when it was hosted at Subversion or Bazaar).

Cheers,
-- 
Luis Lavena
AREA 17
-
Perfection in design is achieved not when there is nothing more to add,
but rather when there is nothing more to take away.
Antoine de Saint-Exup?ry

From djberg96 at gmail.com  Wed Oct 21 21:20:15 2009
From: djberg96 at gmail.com (Daniel Berger)
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 19:20:15 -0600
Subject: [Win32utils-devel] Git?
In-Reply-To: <71166b3b0910180740i53e2a23did8f60652e73f0fb3@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6037b70c0910180656s6833bfb5oca4691bd7eedf832@mail.gmail.com>
	<71166b3b0910180740i53e2a23did8f60652e73f0fb3@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4ADFB34F.2030001@gmail.com>

Luis Lavena wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 11:56 AM, Daniel Berger <djberg96 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Ok, so I've gone and learned git. Well, learned it well enough to get
>> by, anyway. I can pull and push with the best of 'em!
>>
>> Are people on the list in favor of switching to git (on github)?
>> Opposed? Or indifferent?
>>
> 
> In favor here.
> 
>> I personally can live with CVS, but I realize git is quite popular,
>> and it might bring greater exposure to the project.
>>
> 
> CVS has keep me out of the loop to contribute to this project, mostly
> because installing and setting CVS has been pushed out of my brain in
> favor of Mercurial, Subversion, Bazaar and Git itself.

I guess I don't understand this. Ok, so it's easier to setup a git 
server, but that's irrelevant since RF handles that for you. And cvs 
co/add/commit are no different in practice.

>> Thoughts?
>>
> 
> The repository conversion/relocation to GitHub will also increase the
> contribution network, exposure and tools to manage these (Fork queue,
> for example).
> 
> As example, a project that noones was going to work with
> (RubyInstaller) got several contributions, forks and active patches,
> bigger than when it was hosted at Subversion or Bazaar).

This seems to be the only real reason to do it - exposure.

Well, I'll probably move win32-api over first, with both the "C" and 
"FFI" branches. Maybe this weekend.

Regards,

Dan

From luislavena at gmail.com  Wed Oct 21 21:37:05 2009
From: luislavena at gmail.com (Luis Lavena)
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 22:37:05 -0300
Subject: [Win32utils-devel] Git?
In-Reply-To: <4ADFB34F.2030001@gmail.com>
References: <6037b70c0910180656s6833bfb5oca4691bd7eedf832@mail.gmail.com> 
	<71166b3b0910180740i53e2a23did8f60652e73f0fb3@mail.gmail.com> 
	<4ADFB34F.2030001@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <71166b3b0910211837p24228d7bqf98d56082360c276@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 10:20 PM, Daniel Berger <djberg96 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Luis Lavena wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 11:56 AM, Daniel Berger <djberg96 at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Ok, so I've gone and learned git. Well, learned it well enough to get
>>> by, anyway. I can pull and push with the best of 'em!
>>>
>>> Are people on the list in favor of switching to git (on github)?
>>> Opposed? Or indifferent?
>>>
>>
>> In favor here.
>>
>>> I personally can live with CVS, but I realize git is quite popular,
>>> and it might bring greater exposure to the project.
>>>
>>
>> CVS has keep me out of the loop to contribute to this project, mostly
>> because installing and setting CVS has been pushed out of my brain in
>> favor of Mercurial, Subversion, Bazaar and Git itself.
>
> I guess I don't understand this. Ok, so it's easier to setup a git server,
> but that's irrelevant since RF handles that for you. And cvs co/add/commit
> are no different in practice.
>

No, is not about the server, but the workflow. It is also the
inability to "offline" work or clone it so my I can keep I record of
my changes.

For example, I don't remember the last time I installed or configure CVS.

>
> This seems to be the only real reason to do it - exposure.
>

>From your POV, there are others in relation to performance, offline
functionality and of course, adaptive workflows.

> Well, I'll probably move win32-api over first, with both the "C" and "FFI"
> branches. Maybe this weekend.
>

Excellent. Thank you.

-- 
Luis Lavena
AREA 17
-
Perfection in design is achieved not when there is nothing more to add,
but rather when there is nothing more to take away.
Antoine de Saint-Exup?ry

From jftucker at gmail.com  Thu Oct 22 04:42:05 2009
From: jftucker at gmail.com (James Tucker)
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2009 09:42:05 +0100
Subject: [Win32utils-devel] Git?
In-Reply-To: <71166b3b0910211837p24228d7bqf98d56082360c276@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6037b70c0910180656s6833bfb5oca4691bd7eedf832@mail.gmail.com>
	<71166b3b0910180740i53e2a23did8f60652e73f0fb3@mail.gmail.com>
	<4ADFB34F.2030001@gmail.com>
	<71166b3b0910211837p24228d7bqf98d56082360c276@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <9F89AD3D-26E3-4539-985B-D00228BDEAFA@gmail.com>


On 22 Oct 2009, at 02:37, Luis Lavena wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 10:20 PM, Daniel Berger <djberg96 at gmail.com>  
> wrote:
>> Luis Lavena wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 11:56 AM, Daniel Berger <djberg96 at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Ok, so I've gone and learned git. Well, learned it well enough to  
>>>> get
>>>> by, anyway. I can pull and push with the best of 'em!
>>>>
>>>> Are people on the list in favor of switching to git (on github)?
>>>> Opposed? Or indifferent?
>>>>
>>>
>>> In favor here.
>>>
>>>> I personally can live with CVS, but I realize git is quite popular,
>>>> and it might bring greater exposure to the project.
>>>>
>>>
>>> CVS has keep me out of the loop to contribute to this project,  
>>> mostly
>>> because installing and setting CVS has been pushed out of my brain  
>>> in
>>> favor of Mercurial, Subversion, Bazaar and Git itself.
>>
>> I guess I don't understand this. Ok, so it's easier to setup a git  
>> server,
>> but that's irrelevant since RF handles that for you. And cvs co/add/ 
>> commit
>> are no different in practice.
>>
>
> No, is not about the server, but the workflow. It is also the
> inability to "offline" work or clone it so my I can keep I record of
> my changes.
>
> For example, I don't remember the last time I installed or configure  
> CVS.

Honestly, I hit a lot of SCMs regularly, and cvs is a bit of a pain  
with it's authentication system. The thing is, git / hg / darcs / bz  
are much more comfortable, and I'm coming to settle on git these days,  
because of it's efficiency really. Most of the common commands are in  
muscle memory anyway, and I've got other parts of my workflows aliased  
down to 2-3 chars for most operations.

The thing that a dcvs will give you, is the opportunity for others to  
"take it away" for extended periods of time without having a merging  
nightmare. I think this is a genuinely important feature for OSS.

>
>>
>> This seems to be the only real reason to do it - exposure.
>>
>
>> From your POV, there are others in relation to performance, offline
> functionality and of course, adaptive workflows.
>
>> Well, I'll probably move win32-api over first, with both the "C"  
>> and "FFI"
>> branches. Maybe this weekend.
>>
>
> Excellent. Thank you.
>
> -- 
> Luis Lavena
> AREA 17
> -
> Perfection in design is achieved not when there is nothing more to  
> add,
> but rather when there is nothing more to take away.
> Antoine de Saint-Exup?ry
> _______________________________________________
> win32utils-devel mailing list
> win32utils-devel at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/win32utils-devel


From djberg96 at gmail.com  Sun Oct 25 23:17:15 2009
From: djberg96 at gmail.com (Daniel Berger)
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 21:17:15 -0600
Subject: [Win32utils-devel] Git?
In-Reply-To: <9F89AD3D-26E3-4539-985B-D00228BDEAFA@gmail.com>
References: <6037b70c0910180656s6833bfb5oca4691bd7eedf832@mail.gmail.com>	<71166b3b0910180740i53e2a23did8f60652e73f0fb3@mail.gmail.com>	<4ADFB34F.2030001@gmail.com>	<71166b3b0910211837p24228d7bqf98d56082360c276@mail.gmail.com>
	<9F89AD3D-26E3-4539-985B-D00228BDEAFA@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4AE514BB.8000503@gmail.com>

James Tucker wrote:
> 
> On 22 Oct 2009, at 02:37, Luis Lavena wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 10:20 PM, Daniel Berger <djberg96 at gmail.com> 
>> wrote:
>>> Luis Lavena wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 11:56 AM, Daniel Berger <djberg96 at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Ok, so I've gone and learned git. Well, learned it well enough to get
>>>>> by, anyway. I can pull and push with the best of 'em!
>>>>>
>>>>> Are people on the list in favor of switching to git (on github)?
>>>>> Opposed? Or indifferent?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In favor here.
>>>>
>>>>> I personally can live with CVS, but I realize git is quite popular,
>>>>> and it might bring greater exposure to the project.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> CVS has keep me out of the loop to contribute to this project, mostly
>>>> because installing and setting CVS has been pushed out of my brain in
>>>> favor of Mercurial, Subversion, Bazaar and Git itself.
>>>
>>> I guess I don't understand this. Ok, so it's easier to setup a git 
>>> server,
>>> but that's irrelevant since RF handles that for you. And cvs 
>>> co/add/commit
>>> are no different in practice.
>>>
>>
>> No, is not about the server, but the workflow. It is also the
>> inability to "offline" work or clone it so my I can keep I record of
>> my changes.
>>
>> For example, I don't remember the last time I installed or configure CVS.
> 
> Honestly, I hit a lot of SCMs regularly, and cvs is a bit of a pain with 
> it's authentication system. The thing is, git / hg / darcs / bz are much 
> more comfortable, and I'm coming to settle on git these days, because of 
> it's efficiency really. Most of the common commands are in muscle memory 
> anyway, and I've got other parts of my workflows aliased down to 2-3 
> chars for most operations.
> 
> The thing that a dcvs will give you, is the opportunity for others to 
> "take it away" for extended periods of time without having a merging 
> nightmare. I think this is a genuinely important feature for OSS.
> 
>>
>>>
>>> This seems to be the only real reason to do it - exposure.
>>>
>>
>>> From your POV, there are others in relation to performance, offline
>> functionality and of course, adaptive workflows.
>>
>>> Well, I'll probably move win32-api over first, with both the "C" and 
>>> "FFI"
>>> branches. Maybe this weekend.
>>>
>>
>> Excellent. Thank you.

Alright, I've got the C version up at:

http://github.com/djberg96/win32-api/

I haven't created the FFI branch yet but will get that up soon.

Regards,

Dan

From djberg96 at gmail.com  Wed Oct 28 21:15:43 2009
From: djberg96 at gmail.com (Daniel Berger)
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2009 19:15:43 -0600
Subject: [Win32utils-devel] win32-api ffi branch now on github
Message-ID: <4AE8ECBF.9060009@gmail.com>

All,

I've got the current FFI branch on github:

http://github.com/djberg96/win32-api/tree/ffi

Regards,

Dan