Maintainer for Website needed

[Pierre-Yves David]

On 03/28/2016 09:33 PM, Anton Shestakov wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Mar 2016 17:35:36 -0700
> Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david at ens-lyon.org> wrote:
>
>> On 03/28/2016 10:38 AM, Sean Farley wrote:
>>>
>>> Sean Farley <sean at farley.io> writes:
>>>
>>>> Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david at ens-lyon.org> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 03/08/2016 10:33 AM, David Soria Parra wrote:
>>>>>> Hey Team,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am currently still the maintainer of the Mercurial website
>>>>>> found at https://bitbucket.org/segv/hg-website. Last year the
>>>>>> website has been run in very basic maintainence mode because of
>>>>>> my lack of time. However I think the website deserves more time
>>>>>> as it has great potential.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As such I am looking for someone to step up and take over the
>>>>>> website. I am happy to grand admin access on bitbucket or move
>>>>>> the repository somewhere else. I can help out during the move,
>>>>>> but if nobody is found, we have to coninue the current mode.
>>>>>
>>>>> To move forward with this, the website repository is now hosted
>>>>> on the project infrastructure:
>>>>> https://www.mercurial-scm.org/repo/hg-website/
>>>>
>>>> For shits and giggles, I edited the history to close branches
>>>> properly and be a little more clean:
>>>>
>>>> https://bitbucket.org/seanfarley/hgwebsite
>>>
>>> Gentle ping about this. You can pull from this but need to run:
>>>
>>> $ hg phase -fd 4224
>>
>> I've no strong opinion about this, I don't really see the state of
>> the old history as a huge problem but now that sean went into the
>> trouble of fixing it, why not ?
>>
>> If other people involved in the website (anton?) would like to jump
>> in and express an opinion. I would be happy to apply whatever is
>> chosen
>
> I also say why not.
>
> New repo location suggests that people won't be using pull requests with
> named branches for contributing to it now, so it makes sense to close
> the old feature branches, even just to clean up hg heads output. I
> don't mind if it's done as a history rewrite or as a bunch of separate
> --close-branch commits.

Given an impressive majority of 1 out 1 people that care that are 
interrested in this rewrite, I've applied it. Thanks goes to Sean for 
cleaning this up.

Reclone/rephase/rerere to put your repository back into shape.

Cheers,

-- 
Pierre-Yves David