OK, forking another thread to specifically talk about Codehaus JIRA to GitHub issues migration.
Just had a quick look at Google, and the other way comes first. Not much JIRA -> GH Issues... Not yet asked GH support, I suppose there might be something already exisiting. We also want to talk about the dirty details: how to try and keep as much as information we can, the comments posters id, the JIRA numbers somewhere to be indexable, and so on. Anyone having done something approaching in the past is also welcome to chime in. Thanks ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Hervé BOUTEMY <herve.bout...@free.fr> Date: 2015-03-14 13:43 GMT+01:00 Subject: Re: [mojo-dev] [DISCUSS] Codehaus EOL and MOJO migration To: dev@mojo.codehaus.org ok, we have a clear winner: MojoHaus (and we'll have a statement like "formerly known as Codehaus Mojo project" on our website once migrated) I created the github organization: https://github.com/MojoHaus what are the next steps? Regards, Hervé Le mercredi 11 mars 2015 08:54:09 Hervé BOUTEMY a écrit : > then we have a few proposals: > - Mojo Extras > - MojoHaus > - The Mojo Project > > > I really like MojoHaus > > Regards, > > Hervé > > Le mardi 10 mars 2015 09:28:59 vous avez écrit : > > I think it's a bad idea to not include the "Mojo" name in some form. The > > project has been around for over 10 years now and it widely known and used > > in the Maven community. > > > > I think Mojo Extras is a good name, I would like to propose "The Mojo > > Project". > > > > > ok, another idea: Mojo Extras (I just reserved the github org) > > > > > > = Mojo (ie plugins for Maven) that can't be hosted at ASF for license > > > issues, or generally less strict rules about anything (which comes at a > > > price: this is not a foundation, no dev protection, or anything the > > > rules > > > are done for) > > > > > > > > > I'm not trying anything to replace Codehaus name itself, because > > > Codehaus > > > is really wide > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Hervé > > > > > > Le jeudi 5 mars 2015 15:51:03 vous avez écrit : > > > > Hello Hervé, > > > > > > > > I would suggest that "mojo" is quite unknown for most developers (who > > > > are > > > > non-maven-plugin developers) out there. > > > > Few would even contemplate calling the plugins by their full - or even > > > > abbreviated - name. > > > > Whenever I hear people talking about a plugin, they simply say "the > > > > aspectj > > > > plugin" or equivalent. > > > > Not "the aspectj-maven-plugin" - and definitely not "Mojo's > > > > aspectj-maven-plugin". > > > > > > > > Hence, I don't think that the Mojo "brand" is well-known at all > > > > (actually, > > > > it is more confusing since it can be mixed up with the name of the > > > > Mojo > > > > interface and AbstractMojo implementation). > > > > I don't even believe that the "Codehaus" brand is well-known to the > > > > genereal development community. > > > > If anything, the names of the plugins themselves *could* be known. > > > > > > > > So ... if we are going to refactor the Codehaus codebase and > > > > organisation, > > > > let's do it to best match the future demands. > > > > > > > > I would also suggest being *very* clear about presenting the reason > > > > that > > > > the Codehaus/Mojo project develops Maven plugins instead of the > > > > projects > > > > themselves. > > > > For example - it would seem apparent that the AspectJ project should > > > > develop an aspectj-maven-plugin. > > > > However, that plugin is developed by Codehaus, and I believe that we > > > > should > > > > be a bit clearer in documenting why. > > > > > > > > Fair? > > > > > > > > 2015-03-05 9:24 GMT+01:00 Hervé BOUTEMY <herve.bout...@free.fr>: > > > > > Le mercredi 4 mars 2015 14:16:08 vous avez écrit : > > > > > > *Project name* > > > > > > May not be a concern, but that needs to be cleared out sooner than > > > > > > later. > > > > > > I think that one of the most pressing subject may indeed not be > > > > > > technical > > > > > > but about the name of our project: what name should/could we use > > > > > > for > > > > > > the > > > > > > project. > > > > > > > > > > > > Should/could it stay "'Codehaus Mojo" on GitHub even after > > > > > > Codehaus > > > > > > EOL > > > > > > (meaning we'd certainly use https://github.com/codehaus-mojo org)? > > > > > > or > > > > > > "Maven Mojo" (which would make googling for it quite difficult > > > > > > btw)? > > > > > > Or > > > > > > change the project name even more? > > > > > > > > > > -1 to "Maven Mojo": trademark concern on Maven (Apache Maven, to be > > > > > precise) > > > > > could be "Mojo for Maven" > > > > > > > > > > why not just "Mojo" as the project name? > > > > > AFAIK, it has become a well known name lately: is there really a > > > > > need > > > > > for > > > > > "XXX > > > > > Mojo", whatever XXX is? > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > Hervé > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > - > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: > > > > > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: > > > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: > > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: > > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this list, please visit: http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email -- Baptiste <Batmat> MATHUS - http://batmat.net Sauvez un arbre, Mangez un castor !
