As in terms of the order execution. I am not a lawyer, but I think you can still cut releases with packages in com.twitter even after in it is in apache git. In the early days of Apache Storm, all the Java code was under org.backtype, however releases were still cut without a problem. If this is the case, I would suggest, we move all the code to apache git first (step 3) and then we can work on the other changes such as migrating the package names and etc. By moving the project, to apache git, Heron will look more like a legitimate ASF project sooner.
I also have a question. Do we need to include the twitter copyright on existing files? Many ASF projects that have been donated by companies do not have a copyright in the header for the respective companies. On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Jerry Peng <jerry.boyang.p...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello all, > > I strongly agree with Bill on migrating the code base to org.apache. > This will attract more developers and automatically fix issues > involving copyrights and headers that we don't need to waste our time > dealing with. Heron, as an open source project, is in a state of > limbo. Developers are confused to whether Heron is indeed in ASF or > not, and this could dissuade potential developers from investing in > the project. There has been talk of Heron joining Apache for a very > long time, and I think people are starting to wonder if there is > something wrong with Heron that is still causing it to not officially > look like an ASF project. The most important thing to the success of > an ASF, or any open source project, is the community around the > project. The longer we wait on this, more and more potential > developers and contributors might turn away. Thus, I think we should > push this through ASAP. > > Best, > > Jerry > > On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 7:41 AM, Jacques Nadeau <jacq...@apache.org> wrote: >> I'm -0 on plan. >> >> Why not just import code then do changes 1 and 2 after 3? Just seems like >> getting 3 done is a key blocking item on forward progress of the community. >> >> On Oct 27, 2017 3:16 PM, "Sanjeev Kulkarni" <sanjee...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> +1 >>> >>> On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 9:15 AM, Bill Graham <billgra...@gmail.com> 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 <johndam...@apache.org> >>> > 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 <bmhatfi...@gmail.com> 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 <billgra...@gmail.com> >>> > > 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 <jfarr...@apache.org> >>> > > 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 < >>> > > bmhatfi...@gmail.com> >>> > > > > > 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 < >>> > billgra...@gmail.com >>> > > > >>> > > > > >> 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 >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > >>>
