On Sun, Sep 18, 2022 at 10:27 AM Matthias Koeppe <matthiaskoe...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sunday, September 18, 2022 at 10:14:26 AM UTC-7 Nils Bruin wrote: >> >> On Saturday, 17 September 2022 at 17:55:10 UTC-7 Matthias Koeppe wrote: >>> >>> >>> The conversion of the Trac tickets to GitHub Issues/PRs only works in one >>> shot. Incrementally syncing updates from Trac to existing issues is not >>> possible. >> >> >> Migration *to* GH is one thing, but as has been pointed out, we should have >> an exit strategy as well, or at least an idea of a roadmap to move from >> github to elsewhere. The code itself is trivial to move: it's a git repo. >> However, as has been shown in the past, the discussions (now in tickets on >> trac, but if moved in issues and PRs) can sometimes be of immense value as >> well. I suppose that if moving from GH to GL is as trivial as claimed >> before, GH must have a way of exporting issues and PRs. >> >> Would someone be able to give an informed assessment or a feasibility study >> of extracting issues and PRs from GH? How searchable are they and how do >> cross-links survive an extraction (also important for trac-to-GH)? >> Presently, trac is fairly searchable due to its own search functions plus >> its general indexing by google's search engine. Hopefully we'd have >> something at least matching that for GH. >> >> Perhaps part of our setup should also be that we "backup" this part of our >> github setup: githubs own infrastructure is of course excellently resilient >> against technological problems but a new failure mode is introduced due to >> their governance and policy: in the extremely unlikely event that sagemath >> on GH would get "locked" due to a misunderstanding (or malice?) we might not >> be at their mercy for extracting our valuable history. > > > I agree that it would be valuable to add at least some starting points in > this direction. > As a beginning, I have created the section: > https://github.com/sagemath/sage/wiki/migration-from-trac-to-Git**b#retrieving-data-from-github > to include the link https://docs.github.com/en/rest to GitHub's REST API, > which gives access to everything and is extremely well documented.
I used this GitHub REST API a lot recently to implement proxying of content from GitHub to CoCalc, and it is indeed *extremely* good. This is a 3 minute video demoing importing github repos to gitlab, which emphasizes answers to a lot of natural frequent questions (involving users, issue comments, labels, etc.): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYOXuOg9tQI In my experience, the search built into GitHub is at least 10x (or maybe 100x?) faster than our trac search, e.g., try searching https://trac.sagemath.org/search versus https://github.com/python/cpython/issues . In addition GitHub's advanced search capabilities are useful (in terms of sorting, refining queries, querying by label, etc.). -- William (http://wstein.org) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/CACLE5GDMRpKoaDp8af1ToLnaBsL36uHdFWKnJ3mfZMMxxvLuDg%40mail.gmail.com.
