Hi Olemis, My proposal was to start with a clean git repository that will only contain code related to the version of Bloodhound based on the Django platform. The main reason for this is to ensure it is very clear which code is part of the current active Bloodhound project. We are wanting to attract new contributors to the project and so the codebase should make this as easy as possible.
I am currently working on getting the live site at https://issues.achache.org/bloodhound back online. This will be running on the released 0.8 version and should hopefully not have any of the old tickets or wiki pages unavailable. I am providing updates on this work in the 'Public Bloodhound is down' thread on this list. As for using the Bloodhound Enhancement Proposals for the new architecture discussions etc, once the live site is back online that will certainly be a possibility. Cheers, John On 16 December 2017 at 21:37, Olemis Lang <ole...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 12/16/17, Gary <gary.mar...@physics.org> wrote: > > On Sat, 16 Dec 2017, at 09:00 PM, Olemis Lang wrote: > >> On 12/16/17, John Chambers <cham...@apache.org> wrote: > >> > Hi all, > >> > > >> [...] > >> > > >> > I think using git and gitbox/github for our version control will make > >> > contributing to the project much easier. > >> > > >> > What do you think? > >> > > >> > >> There is a git mirror in github [1]_ . FWIW , I'd recommend github . > >> > >> .. [1] https://github.com/apache/bloodhound > > > [...] > > > > Olemis, > > > > Just in case there is a misunderstanding, I don't think that what John > > was proposing was an either/or situation. I am sure he is aware of the > > existing mirror (though at the moment it really is strictly considered > > as a mirror.) As I understand it, using gitbox will allow us to have a > > better integration with github. > > > > Yes , there is a misunderstanding, so I'll clarify . I just thought > part of the context would be obvious, maybe it's not. > > The long version of my previous message is : > > There is a git mirror in github [1]_ ... and it'd be possible to use > it as a starting point in case parts of the current codebase turn out > to be reusable . Preserving history is very important, in my opinion. > > FWIW , I'd recommend github ... over svn . > > Other comments: > > I am particularly interested in the overview of the new architecture . > If there are any plans to bring back the most recent backup running on > BH 0.8 I look forward to see an initial version of something close to > the Bloodhound Enhancement Proposals, we used to have . Keeping track > through email of decisions and most recent status is a barrier . > > p.s. I got HTTP 404 for issues.apache.org/bloodhound minutes ago , > that's why I said so . There is a chance for the instance to be > deployed at a different URL. > > -- > Regards, > > Olemis - @olemislc > > Apache™ Bloodhound contributor > http://issues.apache.org/bloodhound > http://blood-hound.net > > Brython committer > http://brython.info > http://github.com/brython-dev/brython > > SciPy Latin America - Ambassador > > Blog ES: http://simelo-es.blogspot.com/ > Blog EN: http://simelo-en.blogspot.com/ > > Featured article: >
