I can't respond to anything else, but ZenHub is just a convenience for development. It makes it easier to see what's going on with issues at a glance, but it's by no means required. (At least, not for the openwhisk.org website repo. I can't speak for other repos specifically, but no repo will BREAK without ZenHub — it's a GitHub add-on.) That being said, ZenHub is also free for open source projects: https://www.zenhub.com/blog/open-source/
On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 4:40 PM, Daniel Gruno [email protected] wrote: Comments inline... On 2016-12-20 23:15 (+0100), Felix Meschberger <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi all > > Given misunderstandings on what it means to be able to stay on GitHub we are not ready yet to transfer repositories from the GitHub OpenWhisk organisation to the GitHub Apache organisation thereby renaming the repositories according to the naming conventions. > > The inhibitors for moving quickly basically are: > - Custom developer processes for pull requests What specifically is the concern here? If infrastructure knew the specifics, we could discuss what you need and how we may solve it. > - A number of business critical CI/CD processes This should ideally have no bearing on a vendor-neutral FLOSS project, unless 'business' means something different here. Can you elaborate on this? > > Particularly reconfiguring the CI/CD process will take some time. > > Yet, we understand the desires and policies of ASF to properly manage the source code repositories. > > In the interest of moving forward, the proposed high level plan is: > > (0) Create a documentation page on commit and contribue processes > (as proposed by Matt along the lines of Cordovaâs Contributor > Guidelines [1]) > (1) Transfer the repositories to the Apache GitHub organisation > and setup required mail notifications for commits/pull requests > and issue updates Setup is handled by infrastructure on adoption of the repositories. The default is to route commits to commits@openwhisk and PR/Issues to dev@openwhisk (or issues@ if you have such a list) > (2) Fork the apache/incubator-openwhisk-* repositories to the > OpenWhisk organization under their previous names: > (2a) Repositories are read-only > (2b) Repositories are synced from their fork source This would remove any redirects that would otherwise be in place, but that's your prerogative :) > > User processes have to be adapted as soon as the repositories have been transferred. > > Technical process should be adapted to the new processes within 3 weeks from the transfer of the repositories (unforeseen difficulties to be discussed). > > With the transfer the wikis and issues are transferred as well. For Wikis this is not a big deal. For issues, there are two things to consider: > > (a) how do we deal with bots reacting to issue events ? > (b) how do we deal with Zenhub boards ? Can we live without them for a moment ? Can you explain what Zenhub boards are, and how they play into the development? > > Ideally we would start implementing this plan over the holidays so that repositories are ready and in place after that. According to Greg Infra is staffed to work on this. > > @Greg: Would it be an option to have the read-only forks in the old locations for a certain time ? Markus Thoemmes is an admin of the current repositories available this week. > > @Project: Would that work for you ? > > @Markus Thoemmes: May I ask you to work with Greg to do the necessary ? > > Regards > Felix > > [1] http://cordova.apache.org/contribute/contribute_guidelines.html >
