alink function

[MarcinKosinski]

what about alink function in terms of #198 ?
It only uses github functionality.

[pbiecek]

Is used in addHooksToPrint
So probably it will be refactored.

[MarcinKosinski]

Ok so I'm not exporting this to https://github.com/MarcinKosinski/archivist.github
which is almost done, so I can now remove confusing functions from archivist

[pbiecek]

Will add support for bitbucket / local repos

[pbiecek]

btw: it was not supporting the 'branch' argument

[MarcinKosinski]

I think it was not supporting branch because of past limited version of
aread that also did not react on branch and subdir

2016-02-08 1:54 GMT+01:00 Przemysław Biecek notifications@github.com:

Closed #207 #207.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#207 (comment).

[MarcinKosinski]

How can we mention this in NEWS.md?

[pbiecek]

Are you talking about alink?
It's already in NEWS (for v1.9) I do not see anything that should be added

[MarcinKosinski]

I'm confused since we'll be publishing 2.0 on CRAN and one might not have a
look at 1.9.
In the 1.9 we've added information that alink gives hooks only for Github
so we could merge 1.9 and 2.0 info version, pretending that 1.9 was nerver
there and all new features are for 2.0, and then in a link we could write
that it supports Github and Bitbucket.

I can merge NEWS.md for 1.9 and 2.0

2016-02-08 12:07 GMT+01:00 Przemysław Biecek notifications@github.com:

Are you talking about alink?
It's already in NEWS (for v1.9) I do not see anything that should be added

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#207 (comment).

[pbiecek]

For CRAN, since last CRAN version was 1.8 then I think all changes in 1.9
and 2.0 should be read.
I do not think that merging NEWS for 1.9 and 2.0 is a good idea, since then
they will not be consistent with github.

But imagine a situation that for some reason somebody was using archivist
1.0.
Then he should read NEWS for 1.1+. And it's not like we should merge
1.1..2.0

So I think current NEWS file is in a good shape

2016-02-08 12:12 GMT+01:00 Marcin Kosiński notifications@github.com:

I'm confused since we'll be publishing 2.0 on CRAN and one might not have a
look at 1.9.
In the 1.9 we've added information that alink gives hooks only for Github
so we could merge 1.9 and 2.0 info version, pretending that 1.9 was nerver
there and all new features are for 2.0, and then in a link we could write
that it supports Github and Bitbucket.

I can merge NEWS.md for 1.9 and 2.0

2016-02-08 12:07 GMT+01:00 Przemysław Biecek notifications@github.com:

Are you talking about alink?
It's already in NEWS (for v1.9) I do not see anything that should be
added

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
<#207 (comment)
.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#207 (comment).

pozdrawiam serdecznie,
Przemysław Biecek

[MarcinKosinski]

You've convinced me. If all github functions are now remote functions
refers to alink then we are clear about this :)

2016-02-08 12:27 GMT+01:00 Przemysław Biecek notifications@github.com:

For CRAN, since last CRAN version was 1.8 then I think all changes in 1.9
and 2.0 should be read.
I do not think that merging NEWS for 1.9 and 2.0 is a good idea, since then
they will not be consistent with github.

But imagine a situation that for some reason somebody was using archivist
1.0.
Then he should read NEWS for 1.1+. And it's not like we should merge
1.1..2.0

So I think current NEWS file is in a good shape

2016-02-08 12:12 GMT+01:00 Marcin Kosiński notifications@github.com:

I'm confused since we'll be publishing 2.0 on CRAN and one might not
have a
look at 1.9.
In the 1.9 we've added information that alink gives hooks only for
Github
so we could merge 1.9 and 2.0 info version, pretending that 1.9 was
nerver
there and all new features are for 2.0, and then in a link we could write
that it supports Github and Bitbucket.

I can merge NEWS.md for 1.9 and 2.0

2016-02-08 12:07 GMT+01:00 Przemysław Biecek notifications@github.com:

Are you talking about alink?
It's already in NEWS (for v1.9) I do not see anything that should be
added

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
<
#207 (comment)
.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
<#207 (comment)
.

pozdrawiam serdecznie,
Przemysław Biecek

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#207 (comment).

[pbiecek]

I've just added a more specific info related directly to alink. Just in case

2016-02-08 12:45 GMT+01:00 Marcin Kosiński notifications@github.com:

You've convinced me. If all github functions are now remote functions
refers to alink then we are clear about this :)

2016-02-08 12:27 GMT+01:00 Przemysław Biecek notifications@github.com:

For CRAN, since last CRAN version was 1.8 then I think all changes in 1.9
and 2.0 should be read.
I do not think that merging NEWS for 1.9 and 2.0 is a good idea, since
then
they will not be consistent with github.

But imagine a situation that for some reason somebody was using archivist
1.0.
Then he should read NEWS for 1.1+. And it's not like we should merge
1.1..2.0

So I think current NEWS file is in a good shape

2016-02-08 12:12 GMT+01:00 Marcin Kosiński notifications@github.com:

I'm confused since we'll be publishing 2.0 on CRAN and one might not
have a
look at 1.9.
In the 1.9 we've added information that alink gives hooks only for
Github
so we could merge 1.9 and 2.0 info version, pretending that 1.9 was
nerver
there and all new features are for 2.0, and then in a link we could
write
that it supports Github and Bitbucket.

I can merge NEWS.md for 1.9 and 2.0

2016-02-08 12:07 GMT+01:00 Przemysław Biecek <notifications@github.com
:

Are you talking about alink?
It's already in NEWS (for v1.9) I do not see anything that should be
added

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
<
#207 (comment)
.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
<
#207 (comment)
.

pozdrawiam serdecznie,
Przemysław Biecek

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
<#207 (comment)
.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#207 (comment).

pozdrawiam serdecznie,
Przemysław Biecek