That means we can go ahead with that then...

if anyone have any objections, let me know..


I will ask in the ticket for when that would be done.

On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 4:10 AM Robbie Gemmell <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Only 2 PRs in one repo closed unexpectedly, all the rest remained open
> as expected (including newer and older PRs in the same repo; it's not
> clear why those 2 were different).
>
> It is easy to spot the PRs affected if it happens and react to it as
> needed, and would happen similarly with the other approach but
> affecting all PRs, so I wouldnt especially delay things due to it
> personally (and note Infra are backlogged, so you will likely need to
> wait a bit already). Though of course merging anything that can be
> first wouldnt be a bad thing.
>
> On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 18:11, Clebert Suconic <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> >
> > I was just waiting the outcome from you before I went ahead with
> > ActiveMQ changes..
> >
> >
> > @all should we merge as many Pull Requests we would like and some
> > cleanup before we go ahead with the change? since they are going to be
> > closed apparently?
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 12:50 PM Robbie Gemmell
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Infra did a test change on a single repo last week and all the
> > > remaining repos today, so we have now renamed all the Qpid repository
> > > branches from master to main using GitHub.
> > >
> > > It was straightforward and as expected for the most part, though there
> > > were a couple of slight oddities:
> > > - A couple of PRs did close unexpectedly saying master was deleted,
> > > but the rest remained open and were rebased onto main as expected.
> > > It's easy to tell if it happens.
> > > - A variable number of commits per repo (some none, mostly only a few,
> > > but 40 in one case) caused some 'replay'-like behaviour without clear
> > > reason, provoking JIRA commit comment updates and related mails as if
> > > they had just been pushed afresh.
> > >
> > > In short though these oddities were no big deal and the overall
> > > outcome is nicer than the new-branch + delete-master approach. I'd
> > > suggest asking to do it the same way.
> > >
> > > The related infra JIRA for Qpid was
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21589
> > >
> > > Robbie
> > >
> > > On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 at 20:21, Clebert Suconic <[email protected]> 
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Using the GitHub to rename would be great as any PRs will probably be
> > > > included.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks Rob.
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 4:08 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofre <[email protected]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Nice ! Thanks for the update !
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > JB
> > > > >
> > > > > > Le 16 mars 2021 à 19:08, Robbie Gemmell <[email protected]> a
> > > > > écrit :
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I was originally going to begin the rename process for Qpid 
> > > > > > tomorrow,
> > > > > > but in the past week I have either done or been on the receiving end
> > > > > > of some GitHub-based renames elsewhere which gave a nicer end result
> > > > > > than pushing a new branch and updating the default would.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Knowing that it is an option to push to the Apache GitHub repos I 
> > > > > > had
> > > > > > a chat with Infra about whether it might actually be possible for 
> > > > > > them
> > > > > > to use the GitHub renaming tooling for this, as its just a nicer end
> > > > > > state for everyone. Infra said it isnt something they have done 
> > > > > > before
> > > > > > but would look into it, and could possibly try it out on the Qpid
> > > > > > repos.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You might want to hold off on the ActiveMQ repo changes a little to
> > > > > > see what the outcome of that is.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 at 15:34, Clebert Suconic 
> > > > > > <[email protected]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Thanks a lot, I have everything I need now
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> I plan to work on this next week.. I will follow up with progress 
> > > > > >> as I
> > > > > >> go over this thread.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 6:24 AM Robbie Gemmell <
> > > > > [email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Yep, thats the only config we have for the website auto build, 
> > > > > >>> which
> > > > > >>> is a standard build. Essentially we just enable it and tell it 
> > > > > >>> which
> > > > > >>> branch to build changes from (the one matching whoami) and then 
> > > > > >>> the
> > > > > >>> target branch to commit and push any output updates to, where 
> > > > > >>> they are
> > > > > >>> then picked up from for the web servers.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> The build itself occurs on a Builtbot CI instance at
> > > > > >>> https://ci2.apache.org/#/builders/7. A mail is sent on each build 
> > > > > >>> to
> > > > > >>> commits@, e.g the latest one is:
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rc14442fcfba8395bec5207f2c43b8dbde068f369fabe50de039509fc%40%3Ccommits.activemq.apache.org%3E
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> On Tue, 9 Mar 2021 at 22:46, Justin Bertram <[email protected]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> The website actually uses Jekyll. The branch it uses is 
> > > > > >>>> controlled
> > > > > via the
> > > > > >>>> .asf.yaml file [1]. More details about this are here [2].
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> Justin
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> [1] 
> > > > > >>>> https://github.com/apache/activemq-website/blob/master/.asf.yaml
> > > > > >>>> [2]
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INFRA/git+-+.asf.yaml+features#Git.asf.yamlfeatures-JekyllCMS
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 4:42 PM Clebert Suconic <
> > > > > [email protected]>
> > > > > >>>> wrote:
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>>> I see the website is the pelican system.
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> I'm not sure how the AMQ5 is configured on Jenkins... that's the
> > > > > only thing
> > > > > >>>>> I'm lost now.
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 4:31 PM Clebert Suconic <
> > > > > [email protected]>
> > > > > >>>>> wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> That's right.. I will do it for all the Branches...
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> At this point now I'm looking to what I would need to change on
> > > > > ci-builds
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> I'm looking on ci-builds for things we would need to change..
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> however I don't understand how ActiveMQ5 is configured here:
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/ActiveMQ/job/ActiveMQ/
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> I could find the simple configuration on artemis, but AMQ5 is 
> > > > > >>>>>> using
> > > > > >>>>>> some fancy configuration that I don't know where it's taking it
> > > > > from.
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> @Jb or anyone can you give me some pointers here? I'm really 
> > > > > >>>>>> curious
> > > > > >>>>>> now.. (I know you could say you would change it. .but at this 
> > > > > >>>>>> point
> > > > > >>>>>> I'm trying to understand what is going on :) )
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> Also: where is the build for the website? I can't find it on
> > > > > >>>>>> ci-builds.apache.org
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 3:10 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofre <
> > > > > [email protected]>
> > > > > >>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>> That’s my guess as well ;)
> > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>> Le 9 mars 2021 à 08:57, michael.andre.pearce <
> > > > > >>>>>> [email protected]> a écrit :
> > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>> I assume the plan is to cover all repos, not just 
> > > > > >>>>>>>> artemis.Sent
> > > > > from
> > > > > >>>>> my
> > > > > >>>>>> Galaxy
> > > > > >>>>>>>> -------- Original message --------From: Clebert Suconic <
> > > > > >>>>>> [email protected]> Date: 06/03/2021  14:33  
> > > > > >>>>>> (GMT+00:00) To:
> > > > > >>>>>> [email protected] Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Renaming master 
> > > > > >>>>>> as
> > > > > main
> > > > > >>>>> We
> > > > > >>>>>> will have to create the main branch on gitbox and Infra will 
> > > > > >>>>>> make
> > > > > >>>>> theswitch
> > > > > >>>>>> on GitHub.On Sat, Mar 6, 2021 at 12:15 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofre 
> > > > > >>>>>> <
> > > > > >>>>>> [email protected]>wrote:> Correct, we should focus on gitbox 
> > > > > >>>>>> (that’s
> > > > > why
> > > > > >>>>>> better to ask to infra).>> Regards> JB>> > Le 5 mars 2021 à 
> > > > > >>>>>> 23:16,
> > > > > Justin
> > > > > >>>>>> Bertram <[email protected]> a écrit :> >> > Aren't the Apache
> > > > > GitHub
> > > > > >>>>>> repos just mirrors of the official versions on> > Apache's
> > > > > >>>>> infrastructure?
> > > > > >>>>>> I know when we merge PRs we push to> > 
> > > > > >>>>>> https://gitbox.apache.org/.
> > > > > If
> > > > > >>>>> the
> > > > > >>>>>> GitHub repo is just a mirror> wouldn't we> > have to rename the
> > > > > branch on
> > > > > >>>>>> Apache first? I'm not real clear on all the> > details of how 
> > > > > >>>>>> the
> > > > > >>>>>> integration works so maybe that's wrong.> >> >> > Justin> >> > 
> > > > > >>>>>> On
> > > > > Fri,
> > > > > >>>>> Mar
> > > > > >>>>>> 5, 2021 at 4:06 PM Matt Pavlovich <[email protected]>> 
> > > > > >>>>>> wrote:> >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>>>>> GitHub solved the PR move if the rename is done via their UI:> 
> > > > > >>>>>> >>>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>>>>> https://github.com/github/renaming <
> > > > > https://github.com/github/renaming>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> -Matt> >>> >>> On Mar 5, 2021, at 2:54 PM, Clebert 
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Suconic <
> > > > > >>>>>> [email protected]> >> >> wrote:> >>>> >>> Good point.>
> > > > > >>>> >>>
> > > > > >>>>>> I’m not sure what to do with pending PRs> >>>> >>> In artemis 
> > > > > >>>>>> you
> > > > > could
> > > > > >>>>> use
> > > > > >>>>>> the scripts and they would work.> >>>> >>> On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 
> > > > > >>>>>> at
> > > > > 2:54 PM
> > > > > >>>>>> Matt Pavlovich <[email protected]>> >> wrote:> >>>> >>>> +1 no
> > > > > problem.
> > > > > >>>>>> Please to cover the CI jobs, so we don’t lose those.> >>>> 
> > > > > >>>>>> Thanks!>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 5, 2021, at 11:24 AM, Clebert Suconic <> >>
> > > > > >>>>>> [email protected]>> >>>> wrote:> >>>>>> >>>>> I would 
> > > > > >>>>>> like
> > > > > to
> > > > > >>>>>> propose to rename all of our git branches as main on> >>>>> 
> > > > > >>>>>> all of
> > > > > our
> > > > > >>>>>> branches. This would be a very first easy step to take on> 
> > > > > >>>>>> >>>>>
> > > > > renaming
> > > > > >>>>>> offensive language from our codebases.> >>>>>> >>>>> We could 
> > > > > >>>>>> allow
> > > > > some
> > > > > >>>>>> time before we do that, say 7 days after we> decide> >>>>> to 
> > > > > >>>>>> take
> > > > > the
> > > > > >>>>>> move.> >>>>>> >>>>> Anyone sees a problem with that?> >>>>>> 
> > > > > >>>>>> >>>>>
> > > > > if
> > > > > >>>>>> anyone has internal forks depending on master (say if you have 
> > > > > >>>>>> a>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> downstream branch of ActiveMQ), you will likely have to update 
> > > > > >>>>>> your>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> internal git repos and scripts.> >>>>>> >>>>> We could keep the
> > > > > master
> > > > > >>>>> for
> > > > > >>>>>> some time without being updated, until> we> >>>>> remove it 
> > > > > >>>>>> later.>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> --> >>> Clebert Suconic> >>> >>>> --Clebert Suconic
> > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> --
> > > > > >>>>>> Clebert Suconic
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> --
> > > > > >> Clebert Suconic
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > Clebert Suconic
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Clebert Suconic



-- 
Clebert Suconic

Reply via email to