Do you know if there is a tool we can use offline to convert the cms
content we have to HTML?
Otherwise it might be easier for now to stay with subversion for the site.
Thanks,
Jörn
On Sun, Aug 21, 2016 at 11:27 PM, Chris Mattmann
wrote:
> Agreed, let’s see how it works and then move from ther
Agreed, let’s see how it works and then move from there. FYI there is GitPubSub
for the website so we could do Git for the site so long as we generate it
offline and
check into Git.
On 8/19/16, 12:15 PM, "Joern Kottmann" wrote:
For now the site will stay in svn since the CMS we use doesn'
On Fri, 2016-08-19 at 18:01 +0200, Aliaksandr Autayeu wrote:
> Separating site and code is not enough. Different code requires
> different
> levels of maintenance, that's why it's better to separate sandbox and
> add-ons from trunk too. Sandbox might become outdated or might not
> compile.
> It mig
On Fri, 2016-08-19 at 18:09 +0200, Aliaksandr Autayeu wrote:
> P.S. On convenience. Cloning into single directory and setting up
> single
> project makes it works just as well. Decent IDEs handle this easily.
>
> On tracking history. The need to track history of experimental code
> obfuscates its
For now the site will stay in svn since the CMS we use doesn't support
git.
Infra says they can only migrate us to separate repositories with their
tooling. We can of course do what we like afterwards.
The state after the initial migration will be:
opennlp.git
opennlp-sandbox.git
opennlp-addons.
P.S. On convenience. Cloning into single directory and setting up single
project makes it works just as well. Decent IDEs handle this easily.
On tracking history. The need to track history of experimental code
obfuscates its poor documentation. If the code if properly documented
(including documen
Separating site and code is not enough. Different code requires different
levels of maintenance, that's why it's better to separate sandbox and
add-ons from trunk too. Sandbox might become outdated or might not compile.
It might have a different test or code coverage criteria. It might allow
warnin
Keeping site and code in separate repos: +1
-- Richard
> On 19.08.2016, at 15:17, Anthony Beylerian
> wrote:
>
> @Jörn @Richard
>
> I believe less bloat is always better for code housekeeping.
> For example, although it is small, I think having the site code along with
> the toolkit code just
@Jörn @Richard
I believe less bloat is always better for code housekeeping.
For example, although it is small, I think having the site code along with
the toolkit code just seems a bit untidy.
How about we at least separate those two?
It could also be useful to make a more feature rich site in th
we can use branches instead of repositories.
Thanks,
Madhawa
Madhawa
On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Joern Kottmann wrote:
> Yes, it would be nice to get the next release out with sentiment analysis!
> It is time for the next release anyway.
>
> Jörn
>
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 4:33 PM, Chris
I don't have a vote here, but I'd agree with Jörn: Separate repos will make
it more uncomfortable to track changes across components.
Should the project switch to a uniform versioning and joint releases, that
would also be more problematic.
The project is not particularly large. Having everythin
+1 for separate repositories.
Since they will be under the Apache Github Organization, it will also be
neater to browse them like this:
https://github.com/apache?query=opennlp
I recommend we keep the repository names starting with opennlp-
For example :
https://github.com/apache?query=hado
>
> Why do you think it is better?
>
In general, separating apples from oranges. In practice, not having to go
through irrelevant stuff while reading, searching, refactoring. Less stuff
to clone for build automation. Smaller repos to clone in general.
And you still can do all the above by cloning
Yes, it would be nice to get the next release out with sentiment analysis!
It is time for the next release anyway.
Jörn
On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 4:33 PM, Chris Mattmann wrote:
> Fantastic, Joern! I have some SentimentAnalysis stuff to hopefully commit
> and
> get refactored. Hopefully after that
I don't see the advantage of having multiple repositories, because that
makes it harder to check it out and move things around without loosing
history (git mv).
Why do you think it is better?
Jörn
On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 4:33 PM, Chris Mattmann wrote:
> Fantastic, Joern! I have some SentimentA
Fantastic, Joern! I have some SentimentAnalysis stuff to hopefully commit and
get refactored. Hopefully after that’s done we can ship a release soon and
publish to Central.
On 8/18/16, 5:50 AM, "Joern Kottmann" wrote:
We made some progress here, the repository is now switched to git.
Sounds like great news to me. Few words on setting up access?
For the layout I'd prefer to have separate things in separate repos. Is
that hard to do?
On 18 August 2016 at 14:50, Joern Kottmann wrote:
> We made some progress here, the repository is now switched to git.
>
> Please have a look he
We made some progress here, the repository is now switched to git.
Please have a look here:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-12209
And there are couple of things we have to do now:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENNLP-860
The new repository currently only contains the trunk a
Hi Jörn,
#3 is a mirror on Github of our writeable Git repo from #1. Users
can submit PRs to it, and then it will flow through to dev list in
the form of an email that links to information that we can use to
easily merge into our writeable ASF repo. Once merged, it will sync
out to Github and clos
Here is the jira issue for this:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-12209
Jörn
On Wed, 2012-12-19 at 21:09 +0100, Jörn Kottmann wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I heard at ApacheCon Europe that it should be possible to migrate
> from
> Subverion to Git.
>
> Is there any interest in doing that? If
Can you explain 3, is that a writable mirror at Github?
Jörn
On Mon, 2016-07-04 at 15:35 +, Mattmann, Chris A (3980) wrote:
> My +1 as well..I would suggest, specifically:
>
> 1. Use git-wp
> 2. Borrow and adapt this guide which suggests how to do it
> (i’m happy to adapt)
> http://wiki.apac
+1
r
On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 7:20 PM, Joern Kottmann wrote:
> Thanks for your advice, if there are no concerns I will follow Chris
> suggestion.
>
> The first step is to get us setup on git-wp. I will fill an issue with
> infra to do this for us.
>
> Jörn
>
> On Mon, 2016-07-04 at 15:35 +, Ma
Thanks for your advice, if there are no concerns I will follow Chris
suggestion.
The first step is to get us setup on git-wp. I will fill an issue with
infra to do this for us.
Jörn
On Mon, 2016-07-04 at 15:35 +, Mattmann, Chris A (3980) wrote:
> My +1 as well..I would suggest, specifically:
If can vote, here is my +1.
On 4 Jul 2016 18:35, "Mattmann, Chris A (3980)" <
chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
> My +1 as well..I would suggest, specifically:
>
> 1. Use git-wp
> 2. Borrow and adapt this guide which suggests how to do it
> (i’m happy to adapt)
> http://wiki.apache.org/tika/Us
My +1 as well..I would suggest, specifically:
1. Use git-wp
2. Borrow and adapt this guide which suggests how to do it
(i’m happy to adapt)
http://wiki.apache.org/tika/UsingGit
3. Turn on writeable git wp mirror’ing to apache/opennlp
Cheers,
Chris
+1
2016-07-04 11:59 GMT-03:00 Tommaso Teofili :
> +1
>
> Il giorno lun 4 lug 2016 alle ore 16:41 Madhawa Kasun Gunasekara <
> madhaw...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
>
> > +1
> >
> > Madhawa
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 8:09 PM, Anthony Beylerian <
> > anthony.beyler...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > +1
+1
Il giorno lun 4 lug 2016 alle ore 16:41 Madhawa Kasun Gunasekara <
madhaw...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
> +1
>
> Madhawa
>
> On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 8:09 PM, Anthony Beylerian <
> anthony.beyler...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 11:36 PM, Joern Kottmann
> > wrote:
> >
>
+1
Madhawa
On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 8:09 PM, Anthony Beylerian <
anthony.beyler...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 11:36 PM, Joern Kottmann
> wrote:
>
> > Hello all,
> >
> > do we still want to do this? Has been a while since we discussed it.
> > I am happy to get it done if we
+1
On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 11:36 PM, Joern Kottmann wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> do we still want to do this? Has been a while since we discussed it.
> I am happy to get it done if we reach consensus on it again.
>
> My +1 again.
>
> Jörn
>
> On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 4:40 PM, Tommaso Teofili <
> tommas
Hello all,
do we still want to do this? Has been a while since we discussed it.
I am happy to get it done if we reach consensus on it again.
My +1 again.
Jörn
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 4:40 PM, Tommaso Teofili
wrote:
> in my opinion that would be good, +1
> Tommaso
>
>
> 2012/12/19 Jörn Kottman
in my opinion that would be good, +1
Tommaso
2012/12/19 Jörn Kottmann
> Hi all,
>
> I heard at ApacheCon Europe that it should be possible to migrate from
> Subverion to Git.
>
> Is there any interest in doing that? If we decide to do it I suggest to
> wait until the
> 1.5.3 release is done so
+1, definitely.
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 7:59 PM, William Colen wrote:
> +1 to move after 1.5.3
>
> William Colen
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 10:09 PM, James Kosin
> wrote:
>
> > I've used both
> >
> > Only thing is I find SVN a little easier on the beginner.
> > Git has many options that
+1 to move after 1.5.3
William Colen
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 10:09 PM, James Kosin wrote:
> I've used both
>
> Only thing is I find SVN a little easier on the beginner.
> Git has many options that aren't so obvious as to the purpose... until
> you get your hands dirty. I've had several g
I've used both
Only thing is I find SVN a little easier on the beginner.
Git has many options that aren't so obvious as to the purpose... until
you get your hands dirty. I've had several git projects get in a state
of not updating as a result.
James Kosin
On 12/19/2012 4:05 PM, Aliaksandr A
I'm in favor, I use it anyway, it's much faster. I'd also wait till 1.5.3
release.
Aliaksandr
On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 9:09 PM, Jörn Kottmann wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I heard at ApacheCon Europe that it should be possible to migrate from
> Subverion to Git.
>
> Is there any interest in doing that? I
Hi all,
I heard at ApacheCon Europe that it should be possible to migrate from
Subverion to Git.
Is there any interest in doing that? If we decide to do it I suggest to
wait until the
1.5.3 release is done so we have a bit time to also migrate our build
process.
Do have all committers expe
36 matches
Mail list logo
