Hello John On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 5:22 PM, John Chambers <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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. Well , I read the other thread , started by Gary , and it ended up as an open subject . There was a general consensus about migrating on to Django, but it was not clear to me that a decision has been made to start it from scratch . At least I have not read anything about that . In my opinion (cmiiw) that decision should come first . There is no reason for starting from scratch if it turns out that there is no consensus for doing so. If Apache Bloodhound is started from scratch , what would it look like? What shall be done? How? There is where I see the need for (at least one) BEP. I was tempted to paste in here some fragments of Gary's message to support my arguments , but I consider such cross-posting might end up being a mess. Maybe I am completely wrong but , considering the discussions in the list , some other questions should be answered before deciding about the repository . Migrating to git => +1 Use github => +1 ... in the short term until an MVP is obtained Starting from scratch => depends on what we do . We might even decide to start from another similar software powered by Django . In that case , it might be convenient to fork / import another repository instead. In the long term we should be using Apache Bloodhound to develop Apache Bloodhound, like we used to. > We are wanting to attract new > contributors to the project and so the codebase should make this as easy as > possible. > I've been following the conversation and I'm aware of what's been happening with the project for a while . > > I am currently working on getting the live site at > https://issues.achache.org/bloodhound back online. > Your efforts are highly appreciated (by me) . > > 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. > > The exact format is not the point . I mentioned BEPs because that's the way we used to document proposals , so I was expecting everybody familiar wth the history of the project to be on the same page quickly by just making a reference to them . The important thing is to have quick access to the latest version of the proposal. I already understood the goals , that's clear to me. -- 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:
