So now the repository should be back "online". I did a reimport of the google code repository and then rebased the changes in master, that was previously only in the github repo, on top of that. Hopefully I have not missed any commits.
I had to disable the wmq (and the cis was disabled since before) components since they depend on artifacts that are not in any public repos. This was made intentionally. Jean-Baptist, Roman Martin, Stephen and Greg: Could you all please take a extra close look at make sure I have not missed any of your commits. If I have please forgive me and tell me so I can try to fix it. Or just recommit them and push :-) Thanks Pontus Ullgren On Fri, 13 Nov 2015 at 17:06 Pontus Ullgren <ullg...@gmail.com> wrote: > OK so the new imported repo was trashed I guess due to some forced push. > > I will make a new try to fix this later. > Could you please wait with pushing commits for the time beeing. > > // Pontus > > > > On Fri, 13 Nov 2015 at 16:51 Pontus Ullgren <ullg...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hello. >> >> The camel-extra repo from google code has been reimported to a new repo >> on github. >> The previous import has been renamed to camel-extra-firstimport but I >> could not find any easy way to make it read only. >> >> What is left is to reapply the patches I will get onto that during the >> weekend. >> >> Best regards >> Pontus Ullgren >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 at 11:16 David Karlsen <davidkarl...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> That sounds good so we don't loose anything. Can I additionally >>> suggest that the old repo get's closed/set readonly or something after >>> the move so we don't end up here again? >>> Keeping the mailinglist seems reasonable as extra will be very low >>> traffic - and then easier to notice when using same communication >>> channels etc >>> >>> 2015-11-11 9:43 GMT+01:00 Pontus Ullgren <ullg...@gmail.com>: >>> > Great, >>> > >>> > I would be happy to do this new migration (already have the privileges >>> > needed on the github organisation). >>> > However I will wait an additional 72h just to see if there are any >>> > objections :-) >>> > >>> > // Pontus >>> > >>> > On Wed, 11 Nov 2015 at 09:40 Claus Ibsen <claus.ib...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> >> Hi >>> >> >>> >> Yeah sure I think re-creating the code on github with latest from >>> >> google code, and then add those PR's commits that are extra on github >>> >> today could be the way forward. >>> >> >>> >> As we take the latest code from camel-extra then we are sure we have >>> >> all the bits that people are using today from the official releases. >>> >> >>> >> About the extra mailing lists. I would actually prefer to not >>> >> duplicate all the setup for extra, but just use this mailing list, and >>> >> then the github issue tracker for the extra tickets. By using this >>> >> mailing list then its much easier to share knowledge of the extra >>> >> project. I dont think people bother to signup on endless number of >>> >> mailing lists. >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 8:45 AM, Pontus Ullgren <ullg...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >> > Hello, >>> >> > >>> >> > Any thoughts or comments on this ? >>> >> > >>> >> > As I wrote above the two code bases has diverged but since the >>> latest >>> >> > official release has been made from the google code repo I think it >>> >> would >>> >> > be best to treat this as the official repository and recreate the >>> gihub >>> >> > repo with a new import to from google code. >>> >> > >>> >> > Should we have a vote on this ? Or should this issue be handled on >>> the >>> >> > camel-extra mailing list instead ? >>> >> > >>> >> > Best regards >>> >> > Pontus Ullgren >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> > On Sun, 1 Nov 2015 at 00:13 Pontus Ullgren <ullg...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >> > >>> >> >> A short update. >>> >> >> Looked through the commits in the google code repo and github and >>> as a >>> >> >> feared the two code bases has diverged with commits being done to >>> both >>> >> >> places. >>> >> >> >>> >> >> However I think I managed to juggle the commits for the master >>> branch so >>> >> >> that the result is something that is acceptable. I have yet to run >>> tests >>> >> >> and make sure things work as expected. >>> >> >> >>> >> >> I have not yet started looking into merging in the changes for the >>> >> 2.13.x, >>> >> >> 2.14.x and 2.15.x. >>> >> >> >>> >> >> However looking at the commit in github it seems to mainly be the >>> >> >> contribution of Camel IBM CICS and Camel WMQ component. Both which >>> I >>> >> find a >>> >> >> bit strange that they were even added to camel-extra since they >>> have >>> >> >> dependencies to libraries that are not publicly accessible, and >>> must be >>> >> >> locally installed. So these will never be able to build and test >>> in the >>> >> CI >>> >> >> environment. Also I'm not sure about the possible licensing issues >>> for >>> >> >> these components. And will we be able to release them if the >>> person in >>> >> >> charge of the release does not have access to the closed source >>> >> libraries ? >>> >> >> >>> >> >> So a possible, much simpler, way forward would be to rename the >>> current >>> >> >> github camel-extra repo, create a new and simply re-import from the >>> >> current >>> >> >> google code repo. >>> >> >> >>> >> >> We could then sit down and move over the commits that makes sense >>> from >>> >> the >>> >> >> once that was done on github. >>> >> >> >>> >> >> Comments ? >>> >> >> >>> >> >> // Pontus >>> >> >> >>> >> >> On Sat, 31 Oct 2015 at 15:51 Pontus Ullgren <ullg...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >> >> >>> >> >>> Yes, camel-extra copied to github quite some time ago. However >>> after >>> >> that >>> >> >>> there was a period of uncertainty during which more commits and >>> even >>> >> >>> releases where made from the Google code repo up until the point >>> where >>> >> >>> google shutdown there service. >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> As time has gone by it seems that there is a risk that the code >>> bases >>> >> has >>> >> >>> diverge. >>> >> >>> Is there anybody already looking into this? If not I would be >>> happy to >>> >> >>> try to make sure that the latest code from Google code is synced >>> to the >>> >> >>> github.com repositories. >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> Regarding SF from the latest ComDev discussions it turns out >>> that, at >>> >> >>> least to my interpretation, it is up to each PMC to decide where >>> and >>> >> what >>> >> >>> they want to do with their extras project. Nothing will be >>> >> automatically >>> >> >>> moved by apache infra. >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> Best regards >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> Pontus >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> On Sat, 31 Oct 2015, 14:42 David Karlsen <davidkarl...@gmail.com> >>> >> wrote: >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>>> https://github.com/camel-extra/camel-extra >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> 2015-10-31 14:01 GMT+01:00 Krzysztof Sobkowiak < >>> >> >>>> krzys.sobkow...@gmail.com>: >>> >> >>>> > Hi JB >>> >> >>>> > >>> >> >>>> > I have seen the discussion that Camel Extras is going to move >>> to >>> >> >>>> Github. I thought it's done already. Have you already final >>> descision >>> >> about >>> >> >>>> Camel Extras? I have seen discussion on ComDev about moving to >>> SF but >>> >> the >>> >> >>>> projects will be not forced to move together to SF. As i have >>> seen >>> >> Camel >>> >> >>>> prefers Github. I'm looking for >>> >> >>>> > instructions how to migrate the svn repo to git and I thought >>> Camel >>> >> >>>> has already finished this process. >>> >> >>>> > >>> >> >>>> > Kindly regards >>> >> >>>> > Krzysztof >>> >> >>>> > >>> >> >>>> > On 31.10.2015 13:43, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: >>> >> >>>> >> Hi Krysztof, >>> >> >>>> >> >>> >> >>>> >> camel-extras are not on github right. I've done some cleanups >>> and >>> >> >>>> upgrades. >>> >> >>>> >> >>> >> >>>> >> Regards >>> >> >>>> >> JB >>> >> >>>> >> >>> >> >>>> >> On 10/29/2015 08:15 PM, Krzysztof Sobkowiak wrote: >>> >> >>>> >>> Hi >>> >> >>>> >>> >>> >> >>>> >>> Have you already performed the migration to Github? Have you >>> done >>> >> it >>> >> >>>> alone? I assume Infra doesn't support this process? >>> >> >>>> >>> >>> >> >>>> >>> Regards >>> >> >>>> >>> Krzysztof >>> >> >>>> >>> >>> >> >>>> >>> On 17.09.2015 21:00, Pontus Ullgren wrote: >>> >> >>>> >>>> I believe changing the package name would be a real problem >>> for >>> >> >>>> users of >>> >> >>>> >>>> the library. >>> >> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>> Not sure why we can not continue to use that package name >>> since >>> >> >>>> according >>> >> >>>> >>>> to the answers Raul got on the com-dev mailinglist [1] it >>> is up >>> >> to >>> >> >>>> each >>> >> >>>> >>>> projects PMC to decide how there extras project should be >>> >> handled. >>> >> >>>> >>>> So if the Camel PMC decided that the Camel Extras source >>> code >>> >> >>>> should be >>> >> >>>> >>>> hosted on github I do not see any problem to keep the >>> package >>> >> name >>> >> >>>> as is. >>> >> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>> [1] >>> >> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/community-dev/201509.mbox/%3ccadmm+kcy9c6rgodshexgsrduu7jur06jwcs9yp-hc8mapm6...@mail.gmail.com%3E >>> >> >>>> >>>> // Pontus >>> >> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>> On Thu, 17 Sep 2015 at 13:57 Christian Müller < >>> >> >>>> christian.muel...@gmail.com> >>> >> >>>> >>>> wrote: >>> >> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>> I'm also not happy with the support/guidance from >>> dev@community >>> >> >>>> regarding >>> >> >>>> >>>>> this topic and +1 to move to Github now. I'm not convinced >>> from >>> >> SF. >>> >> >>>> >>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>> Before we are releasing our first release there, please >>> check >>> >> with >>> >> >>>> the >>> >> >>>> >>>>> Apache trademarks first, whether you can still use the name >>> >> "Camel >>> >> >>>> Extra" >>> >> >>>> >>>>> or not. The same for the package name (it has apache and >>> camel >>> >> in >>> >> >>>> it), >>> >> >>>> >>>>> because this project doesn't belong to Apache Extra >>> anymore in >>> >> the >>> >> >>>> future, >>> >> >>>> >>>>> in my opinion. >>> >> >>>> >>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>> Best, >>> >> >>>> >>>>> Christian >>> >> >>>> >>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>> Am 17.09.2015 10:43 schrieb "Raul Kripalani" < >>> r...@evosent.com >>> >> >: >>> >> >>>> >>>>>> Agree. From my point of view, if the Camel extras >>> community >>> >> feels >>> >> >>>> >>>>>> comfortable with Github, then go for it. It seems like the >>> >> joint >>> >> >>>> Apache >>> >> >>>> >>>>>> Extras effort has somewhat disintegrated anyway. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>> We did our part: having a discussion there and sharing our >>> >> >>>> concerns at >>> >> >>>> >>>>>> dev@community. So I'm happy with how we dealt with this >>> issue. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>> Let us know when it's done so we can update the links on >>> the >>> >> >>>> Apache Camel >>> >> >>>> >>>>>> website. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>> Raúl. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>> On 17 Sep 2015 07:50, "Pontus Ullgren" <ullg...@gmail.com >>> > >>> >> wrote: >>> >> >>>> >>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> Hello again, >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> So I tried to reach out to com-dev beginning this >>> month[1] and >>> >> >>>> it seems >>> >> >>>> >>>>> to >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> be a dead end. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> Some answers[2] even suggest that it is up to the PMCs. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> So in line of the two previous votes[3] [4] I think we >>> should >>> >> go >>> >> >>>> ahead >>> >> >>>> >>>>> and >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> continue the move to github. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> Best regards >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> // Pontus >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> [1] >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/community-dev/201509.mbox/%3CCABe1WL-mcFvPUmUwjLXmgLUOSSQUrhT5z7Adj2WPVS8NwSQnuA%40mail.gmail.com%3E >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> [2] >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/community-dev/201509.mbox/%3ccadmm+kcy9c6rgodshexgsrduu7jur06jwcs9yp-hc8mapm6...@mail.gmail.com%3E >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> [3] >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/camel-dev/201504.mbox/%3C1391078472.16070484.1428686018450.JavaMail.zimbra%40redhat.com%3E >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> [4] >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/camel-dev/201504.mbox/%3C301126299.246793.1429101018000.JavaMail.zimbra%40redhat.com%3E >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Sep 2015 at 19:54 Pontus Ullgren < >>> ullg...@gmail.com >>> >> > >>> >> >>>> wrote: >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> While I personally think that is github is superior to >>> what >>> >> SF >>> >> >>>> offers >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> (and that bitbucket is superior to github) for >>> camel-extra I >>> >> >>>> don't >>> >> >>>> >>>>> think >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> the choice of hosting company is that big a deal. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> Camel-Extra currently uses >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> * Mailing list provided by nabble ( >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> http://camel-extra.1091541.n5.nabble.com/) >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> * Jenkins provided by cloudbees ( >>> >> >>>> >>>>> https://camel-extra.ci.cloudbees.com/ >>> >> >>>> >>>>> ) >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> * SonarQube provided by SonarQube ( >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> http://nemo.sonarqube.org/dashboard/index/564228) >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> * Jira for issues provided by Atlassian ( >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> https://camel-extra.atlassian.net/browse/CAMEX) >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> * End user component documentations are hosted on the >>> main >>> >> camel >>> >> >>>> >>>>> project >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> wiki >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> So even back when we where on google code the only >>> thing that >>> >> >>>> it was >>> >> >>>> >>>>> used >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> for was to >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> provide a wiki for some project specific documentation >>> such >>> >> as >>> >> >>>> >>>>> release >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> notes and most important >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> the GIT repo. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> So as long as the service provider provides git, a >>> simple >>> >> way of >>> >> >>>> >>>>> hosting >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> some documentation and >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> has a good reputation of keeping a good uptime on the >>> service >>> >> >>>> in my >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> opinion it is not that big a deal >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> where or what is hosting it. The important thing is >>> that we >>> >> get >>> >> >>>> this >>> >> >>>> >>>>> up >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> read-write ASAP. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> Just my $0.02 >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> // Pontus >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Sep 2015 at 17:59 Raul Kripalani < >>> r...@evosent.com >>> >> > >>> >> >>>> wrote: >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi Rob, >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> I think camel-extras belongs to the Apache Extras [1] >>> >> >>>> umbrella... >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> That said, I'm not quite sure what's the point of >>> grouping >>> >> all >>> >> >>>> >>>>> "extras" >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> from all projects under a common ASF umbrella – I'm >>> assuming >>> >> >>>> it's >>> >> >>>> >>>>> for >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> ASF >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> organisational reasons. It definitely doesn't serve a >>> >> technical >>> >> >>>> >>>>> reason >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> nor >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> an administrative one: (a) each Extras project is more >>> >> closely >>> >> >>>> >>>>> related >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> to >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> the parent than to all other Extras project in ASF and >>> (b) >>> >> the >>> >> >>>> roles >>> >> >>>> >>>>> in >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> the >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> camel-extras "organisation" do show some correlation >>> with >>> >> the >>> >> >>>> roles >>> >> >>>> >>>>> at >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> Apache Camel, but they are not necessarily tied >>> together, >>> >> i.e. >>> >> >>>> >>>>> there's >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> no >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> requirement that a committer in camel-extras has to be >>> a >>> >> >>>> committer >>> >> >>>> >>>>> in >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> Apache Camel, right? >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> [1] >>> https://community.apache.org/apache-extras/faq.html >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> Regards, >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> Raúl. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 3:59 PM, Rob Davies < >>> >> >>>> rajdav...@gmail.com> >>> >> >>>> >>>>> wrote: >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> The way I read it is comdev are doing a mass >>> migration to >>> >> SF >>> >> >>>> - its >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> understandable they wouldn’t want multiple targets - >>> so to >>> >> >>>> pick >>> >> >>>> >>>>> one >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> destination for the code move makes sense. However >>> its not >>> >> >>>> clear >>> >> >>>> >>>>> that >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> we >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> have to keep camel-extra at SF - or why we couldn’t >>> just >>> >> move >>> >> >>>> it >>> >> >>>> >>>>> to >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> GitHub >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> ourselves ? >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On 4 Sep 2015, at 15:54, Pontus Ullgren < >>> >> ullg...@gmail.com> >>> >> >>>> >>>>> wrote: >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Victor and David: You are welcome to join the com-dev >>> >> mailing >>> >> >>>> >>>>> list >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> and >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>> enlighten them. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Here is a link the latest answer on that question :-) >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/community-dev/201507.mbox/%3CBY2PR03MB490B6943E12F5D925203A2E99900%40BY2PR03MB490.namprd03.prod.outlook.com%3E >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>> // Pontus >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Sep 2015 at 16:01 David Karlsen < >>> >> >>>> >>>>> davidkarl...@gmail.com >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Why not github? >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 4. sep. 2015 3:54 p.m. skrev "Victor NOËL" < >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> victor.n...@linagora.com >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> : >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Are they even aware of the problem with >>> sourceforge? >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe someone that is known there (such as a >>> member of >>> >> an >>> >> >>>> >>>>> Apache >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> Project >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ;) could tell them before they take the wrong >>> decision? >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> It's even worse than what I thought because after >>> the >>> >> Gimp >>> >> >>>> >>>>> people >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> told >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> SF >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> to stop doing their shady things, they actually >>> insisted >>> >> >>>> >>>>> during >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> 2015: >>> >> >>>> >>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>> https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list/2015-May/msg00097.html >>> >> >>>> >>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>> https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list/2015-May/msg00098.html >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Victor >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Le 04/09/2015 15:36, Raul Kripalani a écrit : >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Quite frankly, SF would be my last resort. But the >>> >> Apache >>> >> >>>> >>>>> Extras >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> repositories are governed by the ASF and the >>> consensus >>> >> >>>> seems >>> >> >>>> >>>>> to >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> point >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> to >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> SF >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> rather than Github (which would have been my >>> personal >>> >> >>>> >>>>> preference) >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> or >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bitbucket. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards, >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Raúl Kripalani* >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apache Camel PMC Member & Committer | Enterprise >>> >> >>>> Architect, >>> >> >>>> >>>>> Open >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> Source >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Integration specialist >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://about.me/raulkripalani | >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 2:22 PM, Victor NOËL < >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> victor.n...@linagora.com >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I arrive a bit late, but are we sure sourceforge >>> is a >>> >> good >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> solution? >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After all the fuss about their terrible >>> behaviour by >>> >> >>>> >>>>> implanting >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> adware >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other spyware in installers available to download >>> >> there. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It became known with the big complain of the Gimp >>> >> project >>> >> >>>> >>>>> (that >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> wasn't >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> even fixed by SourceForge…). >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> See >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/11/08/gimp_dumps_sourceforge_over_dodgy_ads_and_installer/ >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for details. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Victor >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Le 04/09/2015 13:29, Pontus Ullgren a écrit : >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do we not already have volunteers in the current >>> set >>> >> of >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> contributors >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> for >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the project ? >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I for one is willing in continue maintaining the >>> >> project >>> >> >>>> >>>>> once >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> it >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> has >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> been >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> moved (where ever it is moved). >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think the question right now is the progress >>> of >>> >> the SF >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> migration. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> // Pontus >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Sep 2015 at 09:18 Henryk Konsek < >>> >> >>>> >>>>> hekon...@gmail.com> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As far as I know the Apache Extras projects are >>> >> being >>> >> >>>> >>>>> moved to >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> the... >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> SourceForge. So we need to find a volunteer >>> willing >>> >> to >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> maintain >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> the >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> project >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after SourceForge migration. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers! >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> czw., 3.09.2015 o 20:38 użytkownik Pontus >>> Ullgren < >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> ullg...@gmail.com >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> napisał: >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Have not seen any other updates on the comdev >>> >> mailing >>> >> >>>> list >>> >> >>>> >>>>> no. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Perhaps we should reach out to Daniel Gruno >>> (that >>> >> >>>> seems >>> >> >>>> >>>>> to be >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> in >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> charge >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the move) to get a status update for >>> camel-extra. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> // Pontus >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2 Sep 2015 at 23:57 Raul Kripalani < >>> >> >>>> >>>>> r...@evosent.com >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey guys, >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do we have an update on the ASF front about >>> the >>> >> >>>> Apache >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> Extras >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> migration? >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Users are asking for new releases of >>> camel-extras >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> components... >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I quickly went through the ComDev thread but >>> >> found no >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> conclusion. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Maybe I >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> overlooked an email in that thread. Things >>> tend to >>> >> get >>> >> >>>> >>>>> very >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> chatty >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there and there's no clearly marked >>> conclusion >>> >> email. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards, >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Raúl Kripalani* >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apache Camel PMC Member & Committer | >>> Enterprise >>> >> >>>> >>>>> Architect, >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> Open >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Source >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Integration specialist >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://about.me/raulkripalani | >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 8:56 AM, Pontus >>> Ullgren < >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> ullg...@gmail.com >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From this thread[1] it seems that Daniel >>> Gruno >>> >> is >>> >> >>>> the >>> >> >>>> >>>>> one >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> in >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> charge >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the move. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> However I fail to find any indication on the >>> >> >>>> progress >>> >> >>>> >>>>> or >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> roadmap. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Using Github as a backup plan does NOT[2] >>> seem to >>> >> >>>> be a >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> option in >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> the >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> opinion of the community-dev decision. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anyway perhaps we should move this >>> discussion to >>> >> the >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> camel-dev >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mailinglist. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/community-dev//201507.mbox/%3C559EC097.7000707%40apache.org%3E >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [2] >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/community-dev//201507.mbox/%3cby2pr03mb490b6943e12f5d925203a2e99...@by2pr03mb490.namprd03.prod.outlook.com%3E >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> // Pontus >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 at 07:17 Christoph >>> >> Emmersberger < >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cemme...@gmail.com> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is there any date when this move is >>> expected? We >>> >> >>>> have >>> >> >>>> >>>>> still >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> the >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> backup >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> plan >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with Github in place, ... >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 6:54 AM, Pontus >>> Ullgren >>> >> < >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> ullg...@gmail.com >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Diging through the community development >>> list >>> >> shows >>> >> >>>> >>>>> that it >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> will >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> moved >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to sourceforge along with the rest of the >>> apache >>> >> >>>> extra. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/community-dev//201507.mbox/browser >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 14:12 Pontus Ullgren < >>> >> >>>> >>>>> ullg...@gmail.com >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes this has been discussed on the dev >>> list[1][2] >>> >> >>>> and >>> >> >>>> >>>>> the >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Apache >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> community >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> development mailing list [2]. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Unfortuantly there does not seem to be >>> any >>> >> >>>> >>>>> conclusion on >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> this >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> discussion >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> yet. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> // Pontus >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>> http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Moving-camel-extra-to-github-tt5764066.html >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [2] >>> >> >>>> >>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>> http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/PROPOSAL-camel-extra-moves-forward-tt5765822.html >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [3] >>> >> >>>> >>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>> http://www.apache.org/foundation/mailinglists.html#foundation-community >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 19 Aug 2015 at 18:53 Tim Dudgeon < >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tdudgeon...@gmail.com> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Now that the Google code site is about to >>> switch >>> >> to >>> >> >>>> read >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>> only >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ( >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> >>> https://code.google.com/a/apache-extras.org/p/camel-extra/) >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wondered >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> what is going to happen to the Camel Extras >>> stuff? >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Tim >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Henryk Konsek >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://about.me/hekonsek >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Vous utilisez la version libre et gratuite d'OBM, >>> >> >>>> développée >>> >> >>>> >>>>> et >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> supportée >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> par Linagora. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Contribuez à la R&D du produit en souscrivant à >>> une >>> >> offre >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> entreprise. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://pro.obm.org/ - http://www.linagora.com >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Vous utilisez la version libre et gratuite d'OBM, >>> >> >>>> développée >>> >> >>>> >>>>> et >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> supportée >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> par Linagora. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Contribuez à la R&D du produit en souscrivant à une >>> >> offre >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>> entreprise. >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://pro.obm.org/ - http://www.linagora.com >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >>> >> >>>> >> >>> >> >>>> > >>> >> >>>> > -- >>> >> >>>> > Krzysztof Sobkowiak >>> >> >>>> > >>> >> >>>> > JEE & OSS Architect, Integration Architect >>> >> >>>> > Apache Software Foundation Member (http://apache.org/) >>> >> >>>> > Apache ServiceMix Committer & PMC Member ( >>> >> >>>> http://servicemix.apache.org/) >>> >> >>>> > Senior Solution Architect @ Capgemini SSC ( >>> >> >>>> http://www.capgeminisoftware.pl/) >>> >> >>>> > >>> >> >>>> > >>> >> >>>> > 33rd Degree 4charity (http://2015.33degree.org/) >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>>> -- >>> >> >>>> -- >>> >> >>>> David J. M. Karlsen - http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidkarlsen >>> >> >>>> >>> >> >>> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> -- >>> >> Claus Ibsen >>> >> ----------------- >>> >> http://davsclaus.com @davsclaus >>> >> Camel in Action 2: https://www.manning.com/ibsen2 >>> >> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> -- >>> David J. M. Karlsen - http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidkarlsen >>> >>
