On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 7:02 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 05/16/2013 12:16 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
> >
> > On May 16, 2013, at 6:09 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> On May 16, 2013, at 5:29 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 05/16/2013 10:54 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On May 16, 2013, at 4:47 PM, Thomas Mortagne <
> [email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 4:25 PM, Vincent Massol <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>>>>> I'm rather -0 ATM and very close to -1 because:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 1) I haven't heard from a windows dev for a long time, I don't
> think that happens that often
> >>>>>
> >>>>> And it's surely not going to improve...
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> 2) It's a *huge* change and it should definitely not be done
> lightly. We would need to plan a period like 2 full days, all devs would
> need to stop working on what they do and help out. For example all pages on
> xwiki.org having some github links are going to be broken and will need
> to be updated (that's probably around hunded of pages overall)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yes it's a huge change, that's why it's a vote.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> 3) Windows devs have a simple solution which is to use cygwin so
> it's not a blocker
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It's not as trivial as you seems to think and it also mean that you
> >>>>> simply can't use the standard git tools in the Windows world like the
> >>>>> Github application or Tortoisegit without speaking or any EDI git
> >>>>> integration... so not it really can't be seen as some obvious
> >>>>> solution. And it's not like using Cygwin was some king of standard
> for
> >>>>> Windows dev. "use cyggwin" is easy to say but the reality is that a
> >>>>> dev will try to clone XWiki repository with the git tool he is used
> to
> >>>>> and will simply can't, period.
> >>>>
> >>>> What I'm saying is that I don't think it's worth the effort. By worth
> I mean the ratio between the effort and problems it'll require from us vs
> the # of windows dev not using cygwin that'll want to develop for the xwiki
> project…
> >>>
> >>> But this is why we have a democracy and not a dictatorship. If the
> >>> community considers it is worth the effort, and at least some devs are
> >>> willing to work on this, then I think it's their right to do this.
> >>
> >> 1) You should re-read the governance. It's a meritocracy, i.e we vote
> important changes and devs need to be ok. So if one or a few devs want to
> do this but some other don't for some valid reason then it's not going to
> happen until we reach a decision.
> >>
> >> 2) It's all the devs that will bear the cost of maintaining the new
> environment, no just the dev who's willing to do the initial work.
> >>
> >> BTW none of us work on a windows environment and I think it's a bad
> idea to implement support for something that we never use. It can only lead
> to something that gets broken frequently. To overcome this we'd need some
> windows agent and this means supporting that agent and making sure it works
> all the time (we tried in the past and failed for a very simple reason:
> none of the devs use windows and thus we don't care).
> >>
> >>> It's not a good move to veto the will of the community.
> >>
> >> Again (in case you didn't understand) I'm ok on the principle of doing
> this move but doing cowboy-coding without thinking about the consequences
> and letting other fix your stuff by only doing half of the work isn't my
> preferred style…
> >>
> >> We've had enough bad examples of the dev environment being broken for
> week(s not so long ago that it's normal to want to be careful...
> >>
> >>> Anyway, there are other reasons to make the change, not just Windows
> >>> compatibility. It saves about 2 seconds each time a dev wants to go to
> a
> >>> directory from the command line. Going into one subdirectory means
> >>> having to press "x tab <right prefix of the submodule> tab". The first
> >>> two keys are superfluous since they're the same all the time. The
> deeper
> >>> the hierarchy, the longer the time it takes to go there. It adds up to
> >>> more than an hour wasted per year per dev, and I don't think it will
> >>> really take a whole month of every dev to do the migration. If
> everybody
> >>> contributes and we do a systematic effort, it could be done in an hour
> >>> with the right planning.
> >>
> >> So to reiterate and to be constructive, before we start any actual work
> on this I'd like that we do more evaluation. This means:
> >> * see a list of windows coders who have expressed a need (apart from
> Florin who I know already) and who have a real will to participate after
> the move. Do we have at least one?
>
> This is not just about Windows. The committers that vote +1 vote for
> their own environment, not just to fix a problem for hypothetical
> contributors.
>
> And it's not about improving something for existing contributors, but
> removing a blocker standing in the way of future contributors. The
> easier it is for a new potential community member to join, the more of
> these tentative users will actually stick around. And XWiki isn't
> overwhelmed by the number of contributors to afford to voluntarily keep
> out those not motivated enough to actually try to find out why the
> checkout fails and what needs to be done to actually have a working
> environment and go through all the painful process of installing cygwin
> and the the command line tools that work with cygwin.
>
> >> * that we list what needs to be done precisely. I've identified some so
> far:
> >> ** the git path changes
> >> ** modify all the xwiki.org pages linking to code
> >> ** git history, will we loose ability to see history of files?
>
> Not really. In some cases we might have to add --find-copies-harder to
> some commands, but it should work out of the box for most files.
>

I usually use my IDE for exploring history, not the command line, so this
is not that simple IMO.
You say it will work for most files, it is just a guess... we should check
that for real.


>
> Viewing the commits that affect a file on GitHub might not list pre-move
> commits, but the history will s
>
> >> ** others?
>
> * The move will break uncommitted local changes, so all devs should try
> to commit their local changes, at least in a separate local branch if
> not on github. But devs shouldn't keep uncommitted changes anyway, right?
>

Are you thinking about non-commiters ?

* Depending on how they're configured, our IDEs might freak out when
> pulling for the first time, since everything will be moved around.
>
> * Existing pull request should still work, but Jira patches will break;
> they're probably broken already anyway, since we didn't really allow new
> patches to be put there for a while, and most of the paths have changed
> since 1-2 years ago.
>

And any patches maintained by potential existing users for their own use.


>
> * Does anything on Jenkins depend on paths? I hope not, configurations
> use module names, and they will continue to point to the right POM.
>
> * I guess this still counts as xwiki.org changes, but we should make
> sure the pages that work with remote files, like the syntax
> documentation and syntax completion report, will also need to be updated.
>
> * Existing links in emails (and other places with answers like
> stackoverlow) will be broken, but that already happens whenever we move
> a module, for example to make room for api+ui+test submodules, and this
> happened a lot recently, so it's not a new problem.
>
> * Most annoying: forgetting our own reflex of typing x+tab when changing
> the path :-)
>
> > ** what happens to the JIRA links to commits in the Commits tab? Will
> they still work?
>
> Yes, the existing commits will not change.
>
> > Thanks
> > -Vincent
> >
> >> * to list who is ok to participate actively in the move
> >> * that we agree on a date so that it doesn't impact our planned roadmap
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> -Vincent
> >>
> >>>> We're going to loose at least a month before we've finished that
> migration completely and I'm really worried about the toll it'll have on
> our releases...
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks
> >>>> -Vincent
> >>>>
> >>>> PS: With the same group effort we could release a first version of
> the new model for example ;)
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Sergiu Dumitriu
>
> --
> Sergiu Dumitriu
> http://purl.org/net/sergiu
> _______________________________________________
> devs mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
>



-- 
Denis Gervalle
SOFTEC sa - CEO
eGuilde sarl - CTO
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs

Reply via email to