On Sep 12, 2011, at 5:50 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote: > On 09/12/2011 03:15 AM, Vincent Massol wrote: >> >> On Sep 12, 2011, at 9:07 AM, Thomas Mortagne wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 9:06 AM, Thomas Mortagne >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 9:00 AM, Vincent Massol<[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Sep 12, 2011, at 8:49 AM, Thomas Mortagne wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 8:15 AM, Vincent Massol<[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> Result: 5 +1, 1 +0 and no -1 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The vote is passed. I'll try to move them today to >>>>>>> https://github.com/xwiki-contrib/sandbox (note that the calendar plugin >>>>>>> will be renamed since there's already a xwiki-calendar module in there >>>>>>> - not sure what it is, probably a GSOC one). >>>>>> >>>>>> Why in sandbox ? I would say either in their own repository or in >>>>>> retired. >>>>> >>>>> Because: >>>>> 1) own repo means that the project is active and someone is an owner of >>>>> it. We don't have any owner for these projects ATM. They can be graduated >>>>> from sandbox when someone takes the ownership and release a new version >>>>> of them. >>>>> 2) retired mean that these projects are not useful any more and have been >>>>> replaced by better stuff. I think they're still useful for most of them, >>>>> at least for: photo album, calendar, exo, alexa, adwords and s5. For >>>>> workstream it's possible it's not useful anymore with our new message >>>>> stream. >>>>> >>>>> Said differently retired projects means to people: don't even bother >>>>> about those, they're dead and not useful any more. While sandbox means: >>>>> these projects are in uncertain states but can still be useful if someone >>>>> brings a little love to them. >>>>> >>>>> At least that's how I view the difference. >>>>> >>>>> Of course, these projets use the old plugin technology so we could decide >>>>> that anything that uses the old plugin tech should be retired. But if we >>>>> do this we need to decide this for all other projects using plugin tech >>>>> too, not just these ones and there are lots of plugin projects in their >>>>> own repos and in sandbox (not mentioning the several plugins that even in >>>>> platform and that are not retired). We should also consider that some >>>>> people may be using the photo album or calendar plugins so moving them to >>>>> retired isn't a good idea IMO. >>>>> >>>>> WDYT? >>>> >>>> Problem whit moving theses project to sandbox is that sandbox does not >>>> fits very well project which already have tags and branches and >>>> several versions already. If a project was graduate from sandbox to >>>> own repository and because not very active anymore I doubt we would >>> >>> s/because/became/ >>> >>>> put it back in sandbox. >> >> Indeed, that's a good point but we need to find a good general solution >> because this is what we'd be doing when moving stuff to retired too! :) >> >> Maybe we should just have one repo for each project whatever its state >> (retired, sandbox, etc) and instead indicate its state in a READM file in >> that module (or maybe in its name with a convention but I don't know how >> easy/bad it is to rename a repo so a README file sounds easier). > > +1, but we'll leave the existing sandbox and retired in place.
Why? (apart form the fact that it's tedious to move stuff out but this can be automated I guess). Thanks -Vincent > >> If we do this then we don't need a notion of sandbox/retired/active anymore. >> We just need to ensure that we give some visibility for people looking at >> these repos. >> >> For example for plugins we could put in the README something like: "This >> extension uses the plugin technology which has been deprecated and is now >> replaced by Components (see …). If someone is interested in improving this >> extension, we recommend rewriting it as components." >> OR (for ex for calendar) >> "This extension hasn't been active for a long time. However it's an >> interesting extension that could benefit from being contributed to the XWiki >> platform. However in order for this to happen we would need someone to >> rewrite using components, make it follow the xwiki platform best practices, >> add some tests and create a pull request on the XWiki platform git repo" >> >> Thanks >> -Vincent >> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> -Vincent >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>> -Vincent >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Apr 5, 2011, at 6:55 PM, Vincent Massol wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'm proposing to move the following modules from xwiki-platform-core >>>>>>>> to separate git repos in a xwiki-contrib organization on GitHub: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> xwiki-platform-calendar >>>>>>>> xwiki-platform-exo >>>>>>>> xwiki-platform-adwords >>>>>>>> xwiki-platform-alexa >>>>>>>> xwiki-platform-photoalbum >>>>>>>> xwiki-platform-s5 >>>>>>>> xwiki-platform-workstream >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Rationale: >>>>>>>> * They're no longer working or supported >>>>>>>> * We can move them back if the xwiki dev team wants to support them >>>>>>>> again in the future >>>>>>>> * It's cleaner than having a retired module in the xwiki organization >>>>>>>> since a) it's not "polluting" the list of repos supported by the xwiki >>>>>>>> dev team and b) it allows them to be separated in repos >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Future: >>>>>>>> * Also move modules currently in svn contrib to xwiki-contrib org. >>>>>>>> Note that we need to verify if the svn app works with the GitHub svn >>>>>>>> integration too since several users of svn contrib are using it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Here's my +1 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>>> -Vincent _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
