gitpubsub was enabled and changes to gitbox calcite-site repo are live on the site. The SVN repo should be read only now as well so we can't push to the wrong one :)
Kevin Risden On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 10:29 AM Michael Mior <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks for tracking this Kevin! > > -- > Michael Mior > [email protected] > Le mar. 26 mars 2019 à 08:18, > Kevin Risden > <[email protected]> a écrit : > > > > Actually just followed up with infra. The gitpubsub hook should be > enabled > > in the next ~hour or less when puppet runs. I will hold off on the SVN > > change and make sure the gitbox calcite-site repo is working. > > > > Kevin Risden > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 8:11 AM Kevin Risden <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Tried to push to the new gitbox site last night for the 1.19.0 release > and > > > ran into some issues. The gitpubsub hook was not setup so any changes > to > > > calcite-site on gitbox are not reflected on the site. I pinged INFRA > to get > > > this resolved. > > > > > > I am going to push the changes to SVN as well to get the site updated. > > > > > > Kevin Risden > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Feb 17, 2019 at 5:19 PM Francis Chuang < > [email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> @Michael, the svn repo will still be kept, but just unused. See > kafka's > > >> old site: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/kafka/site/ > > >> > > >> I have now pushed a the current working copy of our site to > > >> https://github.com/apache/calcite-site using svn export. > > >> > > >> I have also updated my ticket with infra to ask them to switch the > > >> site's publishing mechanism from svnpubsub to gitpubsub. > > >> > > >> I'll now proceed with updating the publishing instructions for our > site > > >> to git. > > >> > > >> On 16/02/2019 5:37 am, Julian Hyde wrote: > > >> > Agreed, the history of the web site is not very important. > > >> > > > >> > Julian > > >> > > > >> >> On Feb 15, 2019, at 5:58 AM, Michael Mior <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >> >> > > >> >> I think we may want to keep the old SVN repository around if this > is > > >> >> the case, but I personally don't have a problem with losing > history in > > >> >> the new git repo. On a related note, it would be good to find a > > >> >> process for the new repo that can work with a shallow clone so we > > >> >> don't have to have the entire history of the site to push a change. > > >> >> > > >> >> -- > > >> >> Michael Mior > > >> >> [email protected] > > >> >> > > >> >> Le ven. 15 févr. 2019 à 05:29, Francis Chuang > > >> >> <[email protected]> a écrit : > > >> >>> > > >> >>> Hey everyone, > > >> >>> > > >> >>> I have now created the calcite-site repo in Gitbox. It is now > > >> available > > >> >>> via Github and the Gitbox endpoint, but currently empty. > > >> >>> > > >> >>> I am currently trying to migrate the svn repo, but it is taking a > very > > >> >>> long time and eventually timed out for me. A member of the ASF > infra > > >> >>> team has also confirmed that it can take hours or days to complete > > >> [1]. > > >> >>> > > >> >>> I feel that it would probably be easier if we just copy the > existing > > >> >>> files from the svn repo and make that the first commit in the git > > >> repo. > > >> >>> This is what Kafka did for their migration [2]. > > >> >>> > > >> >>> How important are the commits for site pushes? In my opinion it's > > >> >>> probably acceptable if we lose them and start anew with the git > repo > > >> as > > >> >>> they do not document changes to our code base. > > >> >>> > > >> >>> Happy to hear your thoughts! > > >> >>> > > >> >>> Francis > > >> >>> > > >> >>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-17846 > > >> >>> [2] > > >> >>> > > >> > https://github.com/apache/kafka-site/commit/ba6c994ca09629b047ab9175f882877ba03b92da > > >> >>> > > >> >>>> On 11/02/2019 9:00 pm, Francis Chuang wrote: > > >> >>>> Hey all, > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> ASF project sites have the ability to use git instead of > subversion > > >> as > > >> >>>> their repository for web site content [1]. It has been available > > >> since > > >> >>>> 2015 and appears to be quite stable. Quite a few other projects > have > > >> >>>> also moved their websites to git and subsequently, Gitbox (for > using > > >> >>>> Github as their source of truth. As an example, see the Arrow > > >> project [2]. > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> I myself would love to see this as I find gits interface and ux > to be > > >> >>>> much easier to use compared to svn. It also reduces the need to > > >> context > > >> >>>> switch between Git and svn when editing and pushing the site. > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> My overall goal is to find a way to automate the publishing and > > >> build of > > >> >>>> our websites either via Jenkins builds (there are some projects > are > > >> >>>> doing this already when I searched infra) or the new Github > actions > > >> [3]. > > >> >>>> Having the site hosted in Git would make this process much > easier to > > >> >>>> automate. I will need to get in touch with infra to clarify a few > > >> things > > >> >>>> and to see if this is feasible, but I think this is a worthwhile > > >> endeavor. > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> How do you guys feel about moving our site's repository from svn > to > > >> GitBox? > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> Francis > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> > > >> >>>> [1] > > >> https://blogs.apache.org/infra/entry/git_based_websites_available > > >> >>>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-17655 > > >> >>>> [3] https://github.com/features/actions > > >> >>> > > >> > > >> >
