LGTM +1
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 9:15 AM, Bill Graham <[email protected]> wrote: > Any other comments on this proposal from Heron developers? The next podling > report is due on Wednesday so we should address our plan. > > On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 3:38 PM, John D. Ament <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > If you do in fact want to use gitbox (which allows you to have github > > writable repos), infra will need to be made an admin on your organization > > temporarily to do the migration. > > > > Many new projects are doing this, so it's not uncommon to just use gitbox > > since you're already on github. > > > > John > > > > On 2017-10-19 13:20, Brian Hatfield <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Thank you both for the info :-) I had not realized it would just be > > > re-homed in a different Github org. Thanks! > > > > > > Brian > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 11:58 AM, Bill Graham <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > Right, it would still be on github, just at apache/heron instead of > > > > twitter/heron. > > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 8:16 AM Jake Farrell <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Apache git can also refer to the Github Apache org as a number of > > > > projects > > > > > are running in that fashion. They key is that the code has been > > imported > > > > > over to the Apache Infra owned/managed infrastructure > > > > > > > > > > -Jake > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Brian Hatfield < > > [email protected]> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> Silly question - and apologies if this has already been discussed > - > > but > > > > is > > > > >> #3 (Migrate the code to Apache git) required? From my perspective > > Github > > > > >> is > > > > >> much more preferable as it's where nearly every other open source > > > > codebase > > > > >> I interact with is, and the UI is very friendly to newcomers. > > > > >> > > > > >> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Bill Graham < > [email protected] > > > > > > > >> wrote: > > > > >> > > > > >> > Hi, > > > > >> > > > > > >> > In LEGAL-339 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-339> > > it was > > > > >> > concluded that we can in fact move the code to Apache git and > cut > > > > Apache > > > > >> > releases without the SGA. I propose we move forward on that. I > > suggest > > > > >> the > > > > >> > following plan: > > > > >> > > > > > >> > 1.a Refactor all Heron build dependencies (mainly c++ libs) to > be > > > > >> fetched > > > > >> > at build time and not committed in the repo. (#2092 > > > > >> > <https://github.com/twitter/heron/issues/2092>) > > > > >> > 1.b Refactor the bazel checkstyles to support both the Twitter > > > > copyright > > > > >> > (for existing code) and the Apache copyright (for new code after > > the > > > > >> > migration). > > > > >> > 2. Cut the last non-Apache release. > > > > >> > 3. Migrate the code to Apache git > > > > >> > 4. Add incubation disclaimer > > > > >> > 5. Cut the first Apache release. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > What do folks think of that plan? Item's 1a and 1b can happen in > > > > >> parallel, > > > > >> > as could item 2 actually. There will surely be more smaller > > items, but > > > > >> > those are the big ones as I see it. Please chime in if I've > > overlooked > > > > >> > anything major. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > thanks, > > > > >> > Bill > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Sent from Gmail Mobile > > > > > > > > > >
