Whatever happened with this? Ralph
> On May 7, 2018, at 8:38 AM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > And here is my +1. > > This vote passes with 5 +1s binding and 1 +1 non-binding. I'll follow up > with the migration details over the next couple days. > > On 30 April 2018 at 07:04, Apache <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > >> +1 >> >> Ralph >> >> >>> On Apr 29, 2018, at 7:38 PM, Ílson Bolzan <ilbol...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> +1 >>> >>>> On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 3:20 PM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Good point on the clarification. I said all git repos, and that actually >>>> entails: >>>> >>>> * chainsaw >>>> * log4cxx >>>> * log4j2 and all its repos >>>> * log4net >>>> * log4php >>>> * parent pom >>>> >>>> In fact, the only repos this doesn't cover are the old log4j 1 svn repos >>>> that we have. >>>> >>>>> On 29 April 2018 at 05:08, Dominik Psenner <dpsen...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> +1 >>>>> >>>>> Also for the log4net repository. >>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, 28 Apr 2018, 23:59 Remko Popma, <remko.po...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> +1 >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 11:48 PM, Gary Gregory < >> garydgreg...@gmail.com >>>>> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> +1 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Gary >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Sat, Apr 28, 2018, 17:12 Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This is a vote to migrate from the existing git-wip-us >>>> infrastructure >>>>>> to >>>>>>>> the currently supported gitbox infrastructure that Infra advocates >>>>> for >>>>>>>> using nowadays. Using gitbox will allow our projects to integrate >>>>>> better >>>>>>>> with GitHub including the ability to merge PRs directly from the >>>> site >>>>>> and >>>>>>>> the ability to push commits to GitHub and have them be >>>> automatically >>>>>>>> mirrored back to Apache. Not only that, but new Apache projects >>>>> cannot >>>>>>> use >>>>>>>> the old git-wip-us infrastructure anymore, so it makes sense to >>>>> migrate >>>>>>> to >>>>>>>> the best supported option going forward. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The migration process will entail the following: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> * Marking existing git repo as read-only >>>>>>>> * Moving repo to gitbox >>>>>>>> * Update website and pom.xml with new SCM URLs >>>>>>>> * Update local git clones with the new remote URL(s) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Note that this vote only applies to the source code. I'm not >>>>>> considering >>>>>>>> using GitHub Issues instead of Jira, for example. Note also that >>>> this >>>>>>> vote >>>>>>>> does not apply to the use of subversion for publishing the site >>>>>>> (svnpubsub) >>>>>>>> nor the use of it for publishing releases (only available via svn), >>>>>>> though >>>>>>>> moving the sites from svnpubsub to gitpubsub (i.e., storing the >>>>>> generated >>>>>>>> site in a branch called "asf-site", similar to the "gh-pages" >>>> branch >>>>>>>> feature on GitHub) would be a related topic to cover separately. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Please vote +1, +0, -0, or -1. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> >>>> >> >> >> > > > -- > Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>
