+1. There are more important aspects of Git that makes it appealing. Restructuring the code base is a completely different exercise where using Git repositories for different modules is just part of it.
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 9:12 PM, Marlon Pierce <[email protected]> wrote: > My thinking is that we should go slowly and get through the git > migration first before reorganizing the code base. The code > reorganization needs more discussion and will have some non-trivial > consequences discussed below. > > > > Marlon > > On 1/22/14 10:09 AM, Amila Jayasekara wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 6:44 AM, Shameera Rathnayaka < > [email protected] > >> wrote: > >> Hi Amila, > >> > >> see my comment inline, > >> > >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Amila Jayasekara < > [email protected] > >>> wrote: > >>>> Isn't it good to use separate repository to XBaya? My point is, Then > we > >>>> can introduce another GUI client( Web base) and deprecate XBaya in > future. > >>>> > >>> I do not think it is good to have XBaya in a separate repo. There are > lot > >>> of common code which XBaya and other artefacts share. > >>> > >> IMO as a GUI client, Xbaya only depend on Airavata client api? If not > >> isn't it better to do this separation? As a result we will end up > getting > >> rich client API. WDYT? > >> > > There are common code like utils, configurations that both XBaya and > other > > artefacts depends on. > > Again 2 repos mean more work. 2 build servers, 2 release cycles and more > > dependencies. And so far we didnt encounter issues managing Airavata code > > using a single repo. Maybe we can consider this when we really face > issues > > with a single repo. > > > > Thanks > > Amila > > > > > >> > >> > >>> So it is bit tricky how to separate these artefacts into 2 separate > >>> repos. Also incase if we find a blocker in common code we anyhow have > to > >>> release both repositories. So in long term it will be a hassle to > maintain > >>> 2 repos. Again Airavata is not a huge code base, therefore working > with a > >>> single repository will be easy IMO. > >>> > >> Yes i agree with you, if the code base it not huge it is always good to > >> keep all in one repository. the rational behind above suggestion is , > >> Airavata will have multiple GUI clients( XBaya, Web base GUI , etc ... > ) in > >> future. IMO server side developer will not works on GUI client code > >> frequently. But first of all we need to decouple XBaya from server code. > >> > >> > >>> It is certainly good to think about these now. Thanks for bringing this > >>> Shameera. > >>> > >> you are welcome Amila :). > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Shameera. > >> > >>> Regards > >>> Thejaka Amila > >>> > >>>> Thanks, > >>>> Shameera. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Suresh Marru <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Actually I responded pre-maturely. I am myself not convinced if this > >>>>> will help or is needed. Let me withdraw my suggestion and stick to an > >>>>> opinion (for now) to have a single unified repo. We may want to once > >>>>> revisit the layout as we get close to 1.0. > >>>>> > >>>>> Suresh > >>>>> > >>>>> On Jan 21, 2014, at 9:46 PM, Amila Jayasekara < > [email protected]> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Hi Suresh, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I didnt quite understand what you proposed. Are you proposing to > have > >>>>> separate repos for "Airavata Services", "Airavata Client SDK’s" etc > ... ? > >>>>>> If so I am with Danushka. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Also Airavata is a fairly manageable code base. So I also dont see > an > >>>>> advantage having separate repos for each of the sub-components. > >>>>>> Thanks > >>>>>> Amila > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Danushka Menikkumbura < > >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>> Suresh, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> IMO, having independent repositories does not really help unless the > >>>>> components are mutually exclusive and we ship them independently. > >>>>>> Danushka > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 1:32 AM, Suresh Marru <[email protected]> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> In retrospect, it may be better to make this decision now and have > >>>>> INFRA create the required repositories at once. > >>>>>> I kind of liked what Shameera started, just to rephrase: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> * Airavata Services > >>>>>> * Airavata Client SDK’s > >>>>>> * Airavata Web UI’s > >>>>>> * Airavata GUI Tools > >>>>>> * Airavata Admin Tools > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I am + 0 on this. Not sure if breaking up will reduce clutter and > >>>>> provide better manageability or will overwhelm. > >>>>>> Here are some examples, if it helps: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> https://github.com/jclouds > >>>>>> > >>>>>> And the master ASF repo which is an umbrella for all apache project > >>>>> mirrors - https://github.com/apache > >>>>>> Suresh > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Jan 21, 2014, at 2:36 PM, Marlon Pierce <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> For now, I want to keep the same structure with one repository. > >>>>> Assuming > >>>>>>> the vote passes, this will be a simple email to Apache INFRA to do > >>>>> the > >>>>>>> conversion. We can bring up reorganization separately. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Please let me know if I am missing something, though. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Marlon > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On 1/21/14 2:28 PM, Shameera Rathnayaka wrote: > >>>>>>>> Hi Marlon, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> do we have any idea about the git repository structure we will > >>>>> use? all > >>>>>>>> Airavata code will go under one git repository or we will have > >>>>> separate > >>>>>>>> repository to airavata client , airvata server and xBaya? (can be > >>>>> fine > >>>>>>>> grain further if needed). > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>>>> Shameera. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Marlon Pierce <[email protected]> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> Since this will effect everyone, I will start a 72 hour voting > >>>>> period > >>>>>>>>> and discussion thread. Please vote only on the [VOTE] thread so > >>>>> that it > >>>>>>>>> will be easy to count. All opinions are welcome. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Marlon > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On 1/16/14 10:51 PM, Amila Jayasekara wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> +1 to move to Git. > >>>>>>>>>> It seems it is easy for people to contribute with GIT. > (Specially > >>>>>>>>>> situations like GSOC). > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Thanks > >>>>>>>>>> Thejaka Amila > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Suresh Marru < > [email protected]> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Marlon for resurrecting this discussion. Its also timely > >>>>> to the > >>>>>>>>>>> transition before GSOC 14 and as we move towards Airavata 1.0. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> One thing we have noticed is INFRA support for GIT transition > >>>>> has > >>>>>>>>>>> increased over time. Also, the integration with GITHUB, jClouds > >>>>> has > >>>>>>>>> fully > >>>>>>>>>>> exploited this and now there may be other projects also. So all > >>>>> in all > >>>>>>>>> the > >>>>>>>>>>> timing is very good and + 1 to move foreword for Airavata. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Suresh > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 16, 2014, at 2:50 PM, Marlon Pierce <[email protected]> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi all-- > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> We have discussed $subject before for other reasons without > >>>>> much action > >>>>>>>>>>>> [0], so I want to bring it up again. Unless the situation has > >>>>> changed > >>>>>>>>>>>> recently, Apache's Jira no longer links SVN commit messages to > >>>>> Jira > >>>>>>>>>>>> tickets. For background on the issues with SVN, see [1]. > >>>>> This ticket > >>>>>>>>>>>> is still unresolved. > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> The general linking of repo commits to Jira tickets through > >>>>> commit > >>>>>>>>>>>> comments [2] is a good and virtuous thing. We have lost this > >>>>> in > >>>>>>>>>>>> Airavata and need to get it back. This requires moving to Git > >>>>> [3] [4]. > >>>>>>>>>>>> What other consequences are there for doing this? Let's > please > >>>>>>>>>>>> discuss. It will take a bit of time from INFRA to make the > >>>>> conversion, > >>>>>>>>>>>> but this doesn't seem to be awful. We need to preserve > >>>>> history if we > >>>>>>>>> do > >>>>>>>>>>>> this. What else? > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks-- > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> Marlon > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> [0] > >>>>> https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg03881.html > >>>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://ecosystem.atlassian.net/browse/SVN-385 > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> [2] http://www.apache.org/dev/svngit2jira.html > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> [3] https://git-wip-us.apache.org/ > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>>> [4] > >>>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20INFRA%20AND%20text%20~%20%22git%20svn%22 > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Best Regards, > >>>> Shameera Rathnayaka. > >>>> > >>>> email: shameera AT apache.org , shameerainfo AT gmail.com > >>>> Blog : http://shameerarathnayaka.blogspot.com/ > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> -- > >> Best Regards, > >> Shameera Rathnayaka. > >> > >> email: shameera AT apache.org , shameerainfo AT gmail.com > >> Blog : http://shameerarathnayaka.blogspot.com/ > >> > >
