 OpenCOBOL Forum Index OpenCOBOL
opencobol.org forum replacement test | Register To Post |
| Threaded | Newest First | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Bottom |
| Poster | Thread |
|---|---|
| btiffin | Posted on: 2012/4/15 5:54 |
Home away from home   Joined: 2008/6/7 From: CANADA Posts: 1196 |
opencobol.org forum replacement test See http://sourceforge.net/projects/open-cobol/ or https://sourceforge.net/projects/open-cobol/ if you have a login key at sourceforge
Check it out, report back or fore. Cheers, Brian |
| human | Posted on: 2012/4/15 11:23 |
Home away from home Joined: 2007/5/15 From: GERMANY Posts: 1416 |
Re: opencobol.org forum replacement test The bb is an "hosted" app. The direct link is https://sourceforge.net/apps/phpbb/open-cobol/ (I think it's readable without sf-login, too).
As there is no sub-forum created it's currently not possible to post anything... (I'd change that but as I'm simply a "normal" user, I don't have the chance to do so) - please take care of this. Did you already tried to import the old forum contents (the steps would be a dump of the old forum, setting up a local version and upgrade + convert to used phpbb-version + import it at SF)? If it'll help I'd try to do that (but would need at least a dump of the current board). human |
| btiffin | Posted on: 2012/4/16 21:38 |
Home away from home Joined: 2008/6/7 From: CANADA Posts: 1196 |
Re: opencobol.org forum replacement test SourceForge has a long standing bug regarding applying permissions to phpBB forums. For the now, I'm stuck with adding users one at a time. So far, myself and you, human. Hopefully that'll change sooner rather than later.
On the knowledge base. I was just going to cut'n'paste entire threads from the opencobol.org Xoops text archives. Last count, 1447 threads. They will be searchable, and I think the only loss will be datestamps and usernames for context. I might be able to wrangle getting a mySQL dump out of the system if you want to play (but that will likely require pestering Keisuke). The phpBB angle will require everyone that wants to post, to have SourceForge logins, which I hope won't detract anyone from wanting to move. The alternative is having anonymous postings, and I ain't fightin' the robot wars that way anymore. Sadly, I can't just apply a Group permission, so there may be some mucking about getting all the SF accounts approved on the phpBB hosted app. As a bonus, SoureForge already has the open-cobol-list mailing list archived, as these features are already enabled: and I think I like SourceForge, so I'm willing to put in time to make it as attractive to (and as productive for) the community as is feasible. Cheers, Brian |
| btiffin | Posted on: 2012/4/20 22:54 |
Home away from home Joined: 2008/6/7 From: CANADA Posts: 1196 |
Re: opencobol.org forum replacement test open-cobol 1.0 is getting some 50-70 downloads a day off SourceForge. We really need to get 1.1pre-rel into the mix.
86% Windows. We really need to get GNU/Linux into the hands of COBOL developers.  Cheers, Brian |
| vbcoen | Posted on: 2012/4/22 14:26 |
Not too shy to talk  Joined: 2007/2/13 From: Essex, UK Posts: 26 |
Re: opencobol.org forum replacement test I agree, it is time (and well gone) for the current SF release to be updated.
It is not as if it is not avail elsewhere! |
| btiffin | Posted on: 2012/4/28 15:20 |
Home away from home Joined: 2008/6/7 From: CANADA Posts: 1196 |
Re: opencobol.org forum replacement test SourceForge has open-cobol 1.0 in CVS. Would people prefer CVS, SVN, Hg, BZR, or GIT if we make a move to post a community edition of 1.1pre-rel?
(I can't believe SourceForge doesn't offer Fossil, which would be my preference). By community edition I kinda mean a 1.1pre-rel that we can all submit patches to, a little bit outside the 'official' release. OR ... make a copy of 1.1 Feb 2009 and we move the community patchable outside SourceForge and leave any copy on SourceForge as 'pristine'? Aside from a sense of over stepping my bounds, I'd like to get a lesser distribution of 1.1pre-rel, like the kiska.net and Cutler copies, that have a few critical patches for void C function handling and more robust NULL support posted up as a start point. Any and all opinions of preferred Source Control welcome. Cheers, Brian |
| Bruce | Posted on: 2012/4/29 7:57 |
Just popping in  Joined: 2009/6/25 From: Posts: 14 |
Re: opencobol.org forum replacement test I would prefer something other than CVS. I mostly use SVN but GIT would be fine
|
| grc | Posted on: 2012/4/30 6:11 |
Just popping in Joined: 2008/10/9 From: Posts: 18 |
Re: opencobol.org forum replacement test I'd vote for subversion.
|
| human | Posted on: 2012/5/2 7:12 |
Home away from home Joined: 2007/5/15 From: GERMANY Posts: 1416 |
Re: opencobol.org forum replacement test I'd vote for SVN, too. In any case even a community edition needs a project lead. If there isn't one, the code will end up in too many styles, with too different (may incompatible) approaches for problem solutions, ...
If Keisuke/Roger are fine with that I'll vote for SVN@SF --> keep to one (public known) address. As you're a project lead there I suggest you do the leading of the community edition. In any case I thing it's highly important that the community edition will be updated to newer code bases if/when there is a new public "official" version. For being able to do so the community edition needs to keep to Rogers style and approaches. human |
| mrcool | Posted on: 2012/5/4 11:27 |
Quite a regular  Joined: 2009/1/28 From: Posts: 44 |
Re: opencobol.org forum replacement test I vote subversion.
I tried to register at Source Forge over a week ago and haven't gotten the registration email. Do I need to do something else to get registered? There needs to be a project lead. This is true for any project, software or otherwise. I've seen managers throw projects into a developer's "steno pool" with horrible results. For any project to be successful, there has to be someone that "owns" the project. And there can be owners at different levels. A product development "owner", a quality assurance "owner", a platform package and release "owner", and so on. I'm not saying that someone should void the GNU licenses, I'm just saying that the projects should be "owned" by a lead. |
| (1) 2 » | |
| Threaded | Newest First | Previous Topic | Next Topic | Top |
| Register To Post | |
