On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Gary Martin <[email protected]>wrote:
> On 10/04/14 13:25, Branko Čibej wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> Hi ! :) > has anyone considered migrating the main BH instance at >> https://issues.apache.org/bloodhound to a multi-product setup, and >> moving all the BH issues to a product? Doing so would let us create new >> products there and migrate other projects over to using Bloodhound, >> without having to create a new BH instance for each. >> >> Obviously, I have Subversion in mind here; he move to multi-product >> would be only a first step, of course, since we'd have to write a tool >> to migrate the issues off Tigris; but that's a different story. >> >> -- Brane >> >> BTW, you do know that repository browsing doesn't work there because the >> SVN repository plugin uses an old version of the SVN libs that don't >> understand 1.8 format repositories. >> >> >> > Well, it is certainly a long time overdue, yes. > > Based on my (every day) experience with blood-hound.net there are a few rough edges that still have to be polished . I'm hoping to be able to work side-by-side with Ryan during PyCon sprints on some of these (actually recorded as tickets in i.a.o/bh ) . With a naive approach to migration, one side effect of this will be a > change in the base location for all pages associated with bloodhound, from > /bloodhound to /bloodhound/products/BH (or whatever we chose for the > bloodhound prefix). We can do many things including (but not limited to) 1. Run BH instance in i.a.o/bh * ... which also means that the global environment has to be moved somewhere else . 2. Run BH instance as a regular product e.g. i.a.o/bh/products/BH and redirect to this URL namespace all requests that should had been handled by i.a.o/bh * ... which also means that the global environment has to be moved somewhere else . 3. in all cases above the global environment may be served at a product sibling URL I'm assuming that custom web bootstrap handlers will be used (e.g. like those we are using on blood-hound.net) . There are likely to be ways around this of course but it would seem odd to > have such a special status if other projects wish to join us. We need to > decide how important this aspect of the problem is. > IMHO consistency of existing links all over the ML archive (and beyond) is a strong reason to keep i.a.o/bh as it is . That's exactly what makes BH especial : it has valuable history . Obviating that detail will lead to a (potentially) huge amount of dangling references . [...] -- Regards, Olemis - @olemislc
