jump-pilot or openjump-pilot or openjump2 2020-08-14 11:50 GMT+02:00, Eric <eric.openj...@thefactory.io>: > Hi, > > The GitHub support team answered me this morning, stating that the > ownership transfer of the 'openjump' username or organisation is not > possible at the moment: > >> While I'd love to help, I'm afraid we won't be able to release that >> username for you today as it's not dormant (not all activity on GitHub >> is public) or available for release under our name-squatting policy >> (https://docs.github.com/en/github/site-policy/github-username-policy). >> Sorry I don't have better news to share with you on this. >> >> Though it may not apply here, it's worth mentioning that we have a >> trademark policy that could allow you to obtain a username that's >> already been claimed. If the username you're interested in is a >> trademark you hold, I'd recommend taking a look at that policy for >> more information about potentially filing a violation report: >> >> https://docs.github.com/github/site-policy/github-trademark-policy > > I just created an organisation named 'openjump-gis' for the time being > (hyphens are allowed), according to the title of the openjump.org index > page and as it gives an idea of what the project is about. The following > options are also available at the moment: > - open-jump, > - openjumpgis > - openjump-project / openjumpproject > - oj-gis / ojgis > - jump-pilot / jumppilot > - openjump-pilot / openjumppilot > - geopenjump > > Note that openjump is available on GitLab for the moment, if you wish to > create a mirror repository there. > > It's always possible to rename an organisation later on (see > https://docs.github.com/en/github/setting-up-and-managing-organizations-and-teams/renaming-an-organization). > This process automatically updates everything from link redirection to > commit attribution. > > I already added Ede (edeso) and Michaël (mukoki) as owners of this > organisation. > > I also just created an 'openjump-migration' repository as previously > discussed and I am now tuning the settings of both the organisation and > the repository. > > Feel free to modify the content / info / settings about these. > > I should be able to push a first working version for next Monday, maybe > before but as schools reopened on Wednesday here in Scotland (children > don't attend it on a daily basis during this first week), I can't > promise anything. > > Eric > > On 12/08/2020 13:38, edgar.sol...@web.de wrote: >> no worries. i'm pretty sure we are not fixed on that name. for years we >> have been known as /jump-pilot/ (anybody know why?) and it worked as well. >> how about you work with a private repo in the mean time and we'll deal >> with name and organisation when we are ready to branch which is not going >> to be tomorrow ;) >> >> ..ede >> >> On 12.08.2020 13:19, Eric wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Thanks to all of you. >>> >>> According to your answers, I'm in the process of creating a GitHub >>> organisation named 'openjump', containing a public repository named >>> 'openjump-migration'. The current problem is that someone created an >>> account or an organisation with this name last April >>> (https://github.com/openjump), but with no activity since then. I just >>> contacted the GitHub support team to see if it was possible to have a >>> transfer of ownership for this name -- so, of course, with the agreement >>> of the current owner), as it isn't allowed to directly contact the owner >>> for obvious reasons. >>> >>> Apart from that, everything is ready. >>> >>> Eric >>> >>> On 12/08/2020 10:06, edgar.sol...@web.de wrote: >>>> yup indenting is clearly broken in this reply, maybe better not reply >>>> inline with that client Mike ;).. ede >>>> >>>> On 12.08.2020 09:17, Michaud Michael wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> >>> On 07.08.2020 20:55, Eric wrote: >>>>> >>>> Then I checked which OJ lib dependencies rely on JTS and it >>>>> seems that >>>>> there is only deegree 2, >>>>> >>>> without considering here the plethora of extensions/plugins. >>>>> >>> which is the main obstacle. the only clean solution i see is to >>>>> branch out >>>>> a new OJ 2.x that initially will break compatibility to all external >>>>> plugins. >>>>> that's the bad news. >>>>> >>> the good news is that this forces us to retouch pretty much all >>>>> of them and >>>>> during this effort we might eventually come up with a working plugin >>>>> manager >>>>> after all. >>>>> >> Less than a day of work should be required (if not less) to >>>>> update all the >>>>> plugins which do not rely on a dependency which relies itself on JTS. >>>>> I'm going >>>>> to test it, to see if it's the case. >>>>> >> I tried with my plugins and I just needed a couple of seconds to >>>>> do it. >>>>> >>>>> again. we don't have sources for all extensions in OJ Plus at hand or >>>>> setup to >>>>> build at all. the challenge won't be the modding but the finding and >>>>> setting up >>>>> plugin repos. >>>>> >>>>> I wasn't aware of this situation. All of a sudden, it seems to be >>>>> another challenge to migrate all the plugins... >>>>> >>>>> Could we decide to norrow openjump-plus to extensions hosted by the >>>>> project >>>>> only, and revide the idea of a plugin manager (could be a student >>>>> project ?). >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> there is a critical bug opening JMP project files which should be fixed >>>>> before >>>>> we branch >>>>> https://sourceforge.net/p/jump-pilot/bugs/496/ >>>>> >>>>> The idea here is to test the migration based on the OJ 1.15 release, to >>>>> know if it works and to see what could be improved during the final >>>>> migration. Nothing definitive. >>>>> >>>>> We'll try to fix this bug before the definitive migration. >>>>> >>>>> Any format preference for this document? MD (Markdown) or RST >>>>> (reStructuredText)? Both are easily and directly readable from GitHub / >>>>> GitLab. I would probably suggest Markdown as it's slightly more common >>>>> and because we don't need the specificities of RST at this stage. >>>>> >>>>> I also suggest markdown for the same reasons >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >> - (Bonus) Upgrading the Log4j dependency to v2 and therefore >>>>> removing the >>>>> current security issue in link with it. >>>>> >>>>> the reason that this was not done before is that some extensions were >>>>> compiled >>>>> against it. as we are doing a clean break anyway i am not opposed >>>>> anymore. note: >>>>> we have our "own" com.vividsolutions.jump.workbench.Logger which is >>>>> supposed to >>>>> be the one stop solution for extension but internally uses Log4J again. >>>>> >>>>> What I could do is, once JTS and the OJ code have been updated on the >>>>> master branch, to create another branch (based on the latter) to test a >>>>> Log4j update. What do you think? >>>>> >>>>> It is good for me, >>>>> >>>>> >> Open discussion: >>>>> >> - Preliminary remark: I don't want at any point of this process, >>>>> acting as >>>>> if I was taking this project under my umbrella/name. As I wrote to >>>>> Michaël, >>>>> you're the drivers/guardians of this project, I'm just a passenger. >>>>> Therefore, >>>>> just let me know what you prefer, the way you want to do things, and >>>>> I'll act >>>>> accordingly. Thanks, >>>>> >>>>> thanks for contributing your time and effort! >>>>> >>>>> It's the least I can do after having used OJ for years. >>>>> >>>>> I this migration to github and jts 1.17 succeeds, it will be a major >>>>> step in the >>>>> evolution of the project, thanks for your effort, >>>>> >>>>> >> - Would you prefer an open or a private repository? Why do I >>>>> consider the >>>>> private option here? To avoid any confusion with the current OpenJUMP >>>>> repository >>>>> on sourceforge and to avoid some possible premature forks, >>>>> >>>>> we can easily add notes in the Readme pointing out the provisional >>>>> status of the >>>>> OJ2 development. anyone wanting to fork still i have no objections. >>>>> after all >>>>> it's not called open source for nothing ;) >>>>> >>>>> I'm waiting some other answers (from Peppe, Michaël, etc.) on that. If >>>>> none, I'll create a public repository. >>>>> >>>>> I would say let's be open from the start, but I like the following >>>>> proposition >>>>> to have an openjump/openjump-test project first (or maybe >>>>> openjump/openjump-migration), the time to fix main problems before we >>>>> create a >>>>> more official openjump/openjump (to avoid to send a bad image of a >>>>> project with >>>>> plenty of inconsistencies). >>>>> >>>>> >> - Where do I need to create this project? In my personal account, >>>>> or an >>>>> OpenJUMP organisation is created, and the project takes place there (I >>>>> would >>>>> personally prefer this option, in link with my preliminary remark)? If >>>>> an >>>>> OpenJUMP organisation is created, do you want to create it yourself or >>>>> is it OK >>>>> if I create it? >>>>> >>>>> is "organisation" something like a team definition provided by >>>>> github/-lab ? >>>>> >>>>> Yes indeed. The term "organisation" is used by GitHub, and the terms >>>>> "group" and "subgroup" are used by GitLab: >>>>> - (GitHub) https://github.blog/2010-06-29-introducing-organizations/ >>>>> - (GitLab) https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/group/ >>>>> >>>>> An Organisation and a Group can contain several projects. It is quite >>>>> useful to easily link related projects. In the OJ context, one project >>>>> could be the OJ core, another one the default plugins, another the PLUS >>>>> plugins, etc. (or a different project for each plugin). >>>>> >>>>> Even if there is no real convention (afaik), organisations and groups >>>>> are often written in lower case with hyphens if necessary. For example: >>>>> - https://github.com/geotools/geotools >>>>> - https://github.com/locationtech/jts >>>>> >>>>> So for OpenJUMP I would suggest: >>>>> - openjump for the organisation / group, >>>>> - openjump for the main code, >>>>> - openjump-test for the temporary project we are talking about here, to >>>>> avoid any confusion. >>>>> >>>>> Let me know if you agree with this naming, and what to do, i.e. do you >>>>> want that I create this organisation / group or if you prefer doing it? >>>>> If you let me do it, I'll transfer immediately the ownership to all of >>>>> you. >>>>> >>>>> It is OK for me (consider openjump-migration as an alternative to >>>>> openjump-test). Maybe we could also consider the name openjump2 to >>>>> underline the >>>>> potential compatibility problems users may encounter if they use >>>>> external >>>>> plugins. We'll also have to decide about some conventions for projects >>>>> of the >>>>> same organisation hosting extensions : I would suggest to always >>>>> include the >>>>> word plugin (or extension) in th eproject name, except for special >>>>> cases like >>>>> sextante if we clone the code in openjump/. >>>>> >>>>> >> - Have you already got some GitHub/GitLab accounts that I could >>>>> use to let >>>>> you access the project as administrators? >>>>> >>>>> sure, https://github.com/edeso >>>>> >>>>> and https://github.com/mukoki >>>>> >>>>> Thanks. >>>>> >>>>> >> So if I sum up the questions: >>>>> >> - Github vs Gitlab, >>>>> >> - Open vs private repository (just for the period of this test), >>>>> >> - Where? Personal account vs OpenJUMP organisation, >>>>> >> - GitHub/GitLab accounts for administration. >>>>> >>>>> for preliminary testing on your side feel free to use whichever service >>>>> private/public shouldn't matter. for an eventual fork actually used as >>>>> basis for >>>>> OJ2 development let's still talk about details. i'm (and probably the >>>>> others as >>>>> well) not very familiar with setting up projects on either github/-lab. >>>>> >>>>> If you're happy with a public one, it's probably better as we'll >>>>> benefit >>>>> from better CI/CD tools. This should allow us to test the current OJ >>>>> builds, maybe to try different ones if necessary or at least to adapt >>>>> the current process within the context of GitHub/GitLab, as it appeared >>>>> to be a crucial aspect of the migration. >>>>> >>>>> This is really a test to see the feasibility (Git migration, JTS >>>>> update, >>>>> OJ code update consequently, builds, plugins update, etc.) -- based on >>>>> the current OJ 1.15 release for now --, to document the different >>>>> undertaken steps in order to be able to reproduce them if needed and >>>>> when decided (for example to create OJ 2.x). >>>>> >>>>> >> About Ede's b2 point: I tested OJ with a Java 11 environment both >>>>> with >>>>> OpenJDK and an Oracle one. It works with both, as far as I tested it. I >>>>> didn't >>>>> try with Java 14. I prefer using OpenJDK as there is no commercial >>>>> restriction >>>>> with it. >>>>> >> >>>>> >>>>> agreed, we should strive to be openjdk compatible exactly because of >>>>> the >>>>> restrictions that Oracle introduced on their java runtime. >>>>> >>>>> >> Please let me know what you prefer and I'll act accordingly. >>>>> >>>>> up to you, risking that licensing might not be possible, you may work >>>>> out a >>>>> proper conversion routine to a git service of your choice. using your >>>>> documentation we may then using OJ 1.15.1/1.16 as a base for OJ2 >>>>> development >>>>> when/if the licensing is cleared up. >>>>> >>>>> maybe you can shed a light which you think would be the better choice >>>>> (github/-lab)? >>>>> >>>>> As a lot of other GIS related projects are already on GitHub, such as >>>>> JTS, GeoTools, GeoNode, etc., it seems that it would be a good place to >>>>> start with. Some projects like GEOS are directly hosted by OSGeo, then >>>>> mirrored on GitHub and GitLab, and thus benefiting from different CI/CD >>>>> tools. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Quick summary about the current options: >>>>> - choice of GitHub, >>>>> - creation of an openjump (lowercase) organisation in GitHub -- >>>>> question: who does this creation? if you let me do it, I transfer the >>>>> co-ownership to Ede, Michaël and Peppe (others?) as soon as I know >>>>> their >>>>> individual GitHub accounts (already known for Ede). This organisation >>>>> has a link to the OpenJUMP website, to the OJ mailing list >>>>> (jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net) >>>>> - creation of a openjump-test (lowercase) repository within this >>>>> organisation, >>>>> - this repository is a public one, >>>>> - migration of the OJ core (1.15 release -- revision 6242) containing >>>>> the trunk, tags and branches to the openjump-test repository -- being >>>>> aware that there is a critical bug reported here: >>>>> https://sourceforge.net/p/jump-pilot/bugs/496/, >>>>> - this migration uses <sfnetusername>@users.sourceforge.net for the >>>>> authors (i.e. all committers), and keeps the history since the first >>>>> available SVN revision (using the logs, it seems to be the 859), >>>>> - update of JTS (version 1.17) including the update of related OJ code >>>>> (solving the two classes mentioned in my previous message), the update >>>>> of pom.xml, the removal of deegree-core 2 / deejump code (basically WFS >>>>> related code), the creation of a README.md or .rst to clearly state >>>>> that >>>>> this a migration/update test and a link to the current releases / code, >>>>> the creation of a documentation / report about this migration at the >>>>> root of the repository named MIGRATION.md, >>>>> - later, creation of another branch to test if it's possible to use >>>>> Log4j v2. >>>>> >>>>> Ede, Michaël and Peppe, could you let me know if you agree or/and >>>>> disagree about one or several aspects of this list. >>>>> >>>>> Once all your answers are received and a compromised reached, I'll >>>>> proceed accordingly. >>>>> >>>>> Best, >>>>> Eric >>>>> >>>>> so far.. thanks! ede >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Jump-pilot-devel mailing list >>>>> Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Jump-pilot-devel mailing list >>>>> Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Jump-pilot-devel mailing list >>>>> Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Jump-pilot-devel mailing list >>>> Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Jump-pilot-devel mailing list >>> Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Jump-pilot-devel mailing list >> Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel > > > > _______________________________________________ > Jump-pilot-devel mailing list > Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel >
_______________________________________________ Jump-pilot-devel mailing list Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel
