Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
Yes, thank you for the repetition. Wolf Sent from my iPhone On Mar 8, 2015, at 12:15 PM, Marcus marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: Am 03/08/2015 04:52 PM, schrieb jan i: On Sunday, March 8, 2015, Marcusmarcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: Am 03/08/2015 02:08 AM, schrieb wolf.hal...@gmail.com: Why not move web development as well as the code development into Git? +1 any Git. the staging machine is relying on SVN. So, moving to Git would make changes on the website impossible - until someone rewrites the code that is doing the staging and publishing, so that it is (maybe additionally) also working with Git. Thats what I heard. It doesn't need to be the full truth but sounds logic for me. ;-) I think it was said before, we talk about the code not the website. Due to CMS we cannot currently move the web site so that will remain untouched in SVN. sure, I know that. But maybe Wolf had missed this. That's the reason why I wrote it again. ;-) Marcus On Mar 1, 2015, at 6:59 PM, Dennis E. Hamiltondennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: I'm going to add my +1 to this proposal. It occurred to me, when looking into the old OOo SVN dumps that Rob has, that there may be many more downstream users that are on Git and that our being on Git would facilitate accepting appropriately-offered pull requests to the AOO repository. It seems this is a lower-friction way of sending fixes upstream than going the patch creation and submission route. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Jürgen Schmidt [mailto:jogischm...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 04:01 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git. [ ... ] If possible to get a git repo only it make sense. That means we don't have to move any webpage related stuff into git. Just the pure code is relevant her. +1 for a git repo Juergen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
Am 03/08/2015 02:08 AM, schrieb wolf.hal...@gmail.com: Why not move web development as well as the code development into Git? +1 any Git. the staging machine is relying on SVN. So, moving to Git would make changes on the website impossible - until someone rewrites the code that is doing the staging and publishing, so that it is (maybe additionally) also working with Git. Thats what I heard. It doesn't need to be the full truth but sounds logic for me. ;-) Marcus On Mar 1, 2015, at 6:59 PM, Dennis E. Hamiltondennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: I'm going to add my +1 to this proposal. It occurred to me, when looking into the old OOo SVN dumps that Rob has, that there may be many more downstream users that are on Git and that our being on Git would facilitate accepting appropriately-offered pull requests to the AOO repository. It seems this is a lower-friction way of sending fixes upstream than going the patch creation and submission route. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Jürgen Schmidt [mailto:jogischm...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 04:01 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git. [ ... ] If possible to get a git repo only it make sense. That means we don't have to move any webpage related stuff into git. Just the pure code is relevant her. +1 for a git repo Juergen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
Am 03/08/2015 04:52 PM, schrieb jan i: On Sunday, March 8, 2015, Marcusmarcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: Am 03/08/2015 02:08 AM, schrieb wolf.hal...@gmail.com: Why not move web development as well as the code development into Git? +1 any Git. the staging machine is relying on SVN. So, moving to Git would make changes on the website impossible - until someone rewrites the code that is doing the staging and publishing, so that it is (maybe additionally) also working with Git. Thats what I heard. It doesn't need to be the full truth but sounds logic for me. ;-) I think it was said before, we talk about the code not the website. Due to CMS we cannot currently move the web site so that will remain untouched in SVN. sure, I know that. But maybe Wolf had missed this. That's the reason why I wrote it again. ;-) Marcus On Mar 1, 2015, at 6:59 PM, Dennis E. Hamiltondennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: I'm going to add my +1 to this proposal. It occurred to me, when looking into the old OOo SVN dumps that Rob has, that there may be many more downstream users that are on Git and that our being on Git would facilitate accepting appropriately-offered pull requests to the AOO repository. It seems this is a lower-friction way of sending fixes upstream than going the patch creation and submission route. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Jürgen Schmidt [mailto:jogischm...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 04:01 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git. [ ... ] If possible to get a git repo only it make sense. That means we don't have to move any webpage related stuff into git. Just the pure code is relevant her. +1 for a git repo Juergen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
On Sunday, March 8, 2015, Marcus marcus.m...@wtnet.de wrote: Am 03/08/2015 02:08 AM, schrieb wolf.hal...@gmail.com: Why not move web development as well as the code development into Git? +1 any Git. the staging machine is relying on SVN. So, moving to Git would make changes on the website impossible - until someone rewrites the code that is doing the staging and publishing, so that it is (maybe additionally) also working with Git. Thats what I heard. It doesn't need to be the full truth but sounds logic for me. ;-) I think it was said before, we talk about the code not the website. Due to CMS we cannot currently move the web site so that will remain untouched in SVN. currently (as far as I can see) the web site is not part of the RO GIT mirror. rgds jan i Marcus On Mar 1, 2015, at 6:59 PM, Dennis E. Hamiltondennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: I'm going to add my +1 to this proposal. It occurred to me, when looking into the old OOo SVN dumps that Rob has, that there may be many more downstream users that are on Git and that our being on Git would facilitate accepting appropriately-offered pull requests to the AOO repository. It seems this is a lower-friction way of sending fixes upstream than going the patch creation and submission route. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Jürgen Schmidt [mailto:jogischm...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 04:01 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git. [ ... ] If possible to get a git repo only it make sense. That means we don't have to move any webpage related stuff into git. Just the pure code is relevant her. +1 for a git repo Juergen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org -- Sent from My iPad, sorry for any misspellings.
Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
Why not move web development as well as the code development into Git? +1 any Git. Sent from my iPhone On Mar 1, 2015, at 6:59 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: I'm going to add my +1 to this proposal. It occurred to me, when looking into the old OOo SVN dumps that Rob has, that there may be many more downstream users that are on Git and that our being on Git would facilitate accepting appropriately-offered pull requests to the AOO repository. It seems this is a lower-friction way of sending fixes upstream than going the patch creation and submission route. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Jürgen Schmidt [mailto:jogischm...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 04:01 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git. [ ... ] If possible to get a git repo only it make sense. That means we don't have to move any webpage related stuff into git. Just the pure code is relevant her. +1 for a git repo Juergen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
RE: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
I'm going to add my +1 to this proposal. It occurred to me, when looking into the old OOo SVN dumps that Rob has, that there may be many more downstream users that are on Git and that our being on Git would facilitate accepting appropriately-offered pull requests to the AOO repository. It seems this is a lower-friction way of sending fixes upstream than going the patch creation and submission route. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Jürgen Schmidt [mailto:jogischm...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2015 04:01 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git. [ ... ] If possible to get a git repo only it make sense. That means we don't have to move any webpage related stuff into git. Just the pure code is relevant her. +1 for a git repo Juergen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
Hi, a bit late... having worked with both svn and git, personally I don't think git it is easier to use. Given how AOO is developed, it seems to me that cloned repos are not necessary, developers are already working on svn repo. -- Bye, Yuri Dario - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
RE: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
with all committed changes made on that branch. This will happen instantaneously, especially for small experimental branches. In a common situation, in working out a small change, for example, you can sync your working copy (set to master) with the Apache origin, then merge the branch to master, resolve any conflicts that might arise, and then push the resulting changes with the merged branch back to the origin. I've done that. I haven't had to deal with any collisions on Corinthia yet, but I have had them elsewhere and it is intriguing how that works. I have also made throw-away branches where I was experimenting and then simply left the branch to die. I think I deleted such a branch (although it does not really disappear), but I've forgotten. WHAT ABOUT NON-COMMITTERS Non-committers can't push back to the origin server. But they can clone and do everything on their clone-tied working copy as anyone (just as for an SVN check-out). They need to learn how to derive patches and submit them, ideally attached to issues. (I have not broken the code on that. My diffs refer to locations in my local file system, and I haven't figured out how to get around that yet.) But non-committers and even committers (on a very large project) have another way to do this, so long as their clone is accessible on the Internet (on GitHub, say). Someone working on a clone can develop a branch that they propose for inclusion in the origin. They can issue a pull-request to the origin. This notifies someone who is supporting the origin repo that there is a request and they can review the request, inspect what the changes are, and choose to selectively pull the changed material to the origin repo, preserving the branch or not depending on circumstances. There are some involved matters about requiring an iCLA from anyone making a substantial pull request and ASF has some rules about how provenance is preserved while requiring that a committer be the one to make the commits to the origin repo. I haven't gotten into this very much at all, since I am a Corinthia committer and we've received no pull requests at this point. Linus Torvalds has an interesting way of working with these for the Linux Kernel. The pull requests get to what are called lieutenants who are experts on various parts of the kernel. The lieutenants review pull requests and make any change to *their* clone of the kernel repo. Then the lieutenants make pull requests upstream to Linus, who then can do the same, satisfy himself, and do the pull. (I think it is a bit more streamlined than that, so no one has to go through too many steps to review and accept/reject the many pull requests that come in.) That doesn't quite fit the organization of Apache Projects and how there is no hierarchy of committers, so I haven't dug too far into it. My picture here is therefore rather sketchy. -Original Message- From: Yuri Dario [mailto:mc6...@mclink.it] Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 02:54 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git. Hi, a bit late... having worked with both svn and git, personally I don't think git it is easier to use. Given how AOO is developed, it seems to me that cloned repos are not necessary, developers are already working on svn repo. -- Bye, Yuri Dario - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
On 16/02/15 19:01, Kay Schenk wrote: I'm just curious about these statements. Have potential new developers remarked on this to you? Since most IDEs support a variety of version control mechanisms, I'm wondering how the suggestion to switch to git might have emerged. But, again, I have never used git and it might be the coolest thing ever -- I have NO idea! :) If it would have been possible to have a git repo from the beginning then we would have one already. The majority of active developers in the past prefer a git reopo and the git tooling in general. If possible to get a git repo only it make sense. That means we don't have to move any webpage related stuff into git. Just the pure code is relevant her. +1 for a git repo Juergen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 9:53 AM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote: On 13 February 2015 at 18:13, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 3:43 AM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote: Hi. We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo. Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new people) by lowering the barrier. For more documentation on Git at Apache see https://git-wip-us.apache.org/ Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean giving up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git instead. The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work. thoughts ? rgds jan I. I'm not sure I understand the comment about making things easier but then I'm not a git user currently. I'm good with svn. I know we have read only git right now. I did not mean for you and me, and others who are used to svn...using GIT might make it just a little bit easier for new developers. I have no strong feelings for the one or other solution, I am simply seeing it as a possibility to lower the level required to help. rgds jan I. I'm just curious about these statements. Have potential new developers remarked on this to you? Since most IDEs support a variety of version control mechanisms, I'm wondering how the suggestion to switch to git might have emerged. But, again, I have never used git and it might be the coolest thing ever -- I have NO idea! :) -- - MzK An old horse for a long, hard road, a young pony for a quick ride. -- Texas Bix Bender -- - MzK An old horse for a long, hard road, a young pony for a quick ride. -- Texas Bix Bender
Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
Am 02/15/2015 02:19 PM, schrieb Andrea Pescetti: So, from what I can understand, the GIT repository would only replace these three directories: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/trunk/ (which would become the master branch) http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/branches/ http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/tags/ (which would become GIT branches and tags respectively). All the rest in http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/ would stay unchanged and continue to be managed through SVN, which means that this has no impact on people who work on the site and on translators who commit files. OK, if so then I'm out of the game and fine with changing to Git. Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
RE: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
-- replying in-line to -- From: Kay Schenk [mailto:kay.sch...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, February 16, 2015 10:01 To: OOo Apache Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git. [ ... ] I'm just curious about these statements. Have potential new developers remarked on this to you? Since most IDEs support a variety of version control mechanisms, I'm wondering how the suggestion to switch to git might have emerged. But, again, I have never used git and it might be the coolest thing ever -- I have NO idea! :) orcmid I think there are many developers who only use Git and clamor for the familiar. There is also tool religion involved. It takes some brain rewiring to get your head around how git works for an user, but it becomes easy after that. The plus is that every working copy has the entire history, not just the latest of things. Synchronizing with a master is an interesting process, and handling branches is particularly easy if you are careful. Collisions are handled in an intriguing way too. It is easy to start a branch in a working copy for testing an idea and getting it working, then merging it back to the main branch before synchronizing with an upstream master. This doesn't clutter the upstream and if you are careful to keep pulling down any changes from upstream before merging your branch, it can go very nicely. I did a Microsoft Virtual Academy on-line class on Git support in Visual Studio. That was a trip. /orcmid - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
On 16/02/2015 Kay Schenk wrote: again, I have never used git and it might be the coolest thing ever It does have a reputation for being cool. This is justified in many cases, less justified in others. I know some developers who refuse to work with SVN in principle; true, maybe they would be perfectly comfortable with git-svn or even with a recent version of SVN; but relying on SVN is a factor that may scare new developers away. That said, before moving we should ensure that those who work on the code are happy: new developers can perfectly use git already now to checkout the code and to submit patches. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
On 13/02/2015 jan i wrote: Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new people) by lowering the barrier. (Sorry if you already got this message: I'm experiencing problems and delays with Apache e-mails this weekend) So, from what I can understand, the GIT repository would only replace these three directories: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/trunk/ (which would become the master branch) http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/branches/ http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/tags/ (which would become GIT branches and tags respectively). All the rest in http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/openoffice/ would stay unchanged and continue to be managed through SVN, which means that this has no impact on people who work on the site and on translators who commit files. I am OK with the change but we should wait for the opinion of the other committers who routinely commit to the above directories, since they are the only ones who will see an impact. Note that it is known, from previous conversations, that this will require some scripts to be adapted. One of them is the SVNBot that sends notifications to Bugzilla depending on commit messages. Another one is the script that generates filenames and metadata for the buildbots http://ci.apache.org/projects/openoffice/index.html and now relies on the SVN revision number. Nothing impossible of course, but we need to be aware of it. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: OK. Then what is the point of github_team.txt? Vanity only. People will see the Apache badge when looking at your Github profile. So this has little in common with this discussion, which is about two tools (svn and git) both hosted at Apache. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
RE: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
Got it. Sorry for wasting everyone's time. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pesce...@apache.org] Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2015 04:49 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git. Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: OK. Then what is the point of github_team.txt? Vanity only. People will see the Apache badge when looking at your Github profile. So this has little in common with this discussion, which is about two tools (svn and git) both hosted at Apache. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
RE: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
-- replying in-line to -- From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org] Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2015 13:36 To: dev; Dennis Hamilton Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git. On 14 February 2015 at 22:27, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: Corinthia has its code tree (not web site) on Git. There is a mirror on GitHub as Apache/incubator-corinthia. Even then I was unable to do a push to the mirror although I went through the ceremony to pair my Apache ID and my GitHub ID. From that factoid, I have to conclude that all mirrors are read-only or my pairing is not working. I am not certain how to tell the difference. Well I did tell you earlieryou cannot push to a mirror, you have to push to the canonical repo (git://git.apache.org/incubator-corinthia.git) This is true for any GIT repo, and not only ASF. orcmid OK. Then what is the point of github_team.txt? I notice that I am listed as a member of the Apache project at GitHub although github_team.txt still lists my application as pending. (I did just change my entry at GitHub to Public from Private.) /orcmid rgds jan I. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org] Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 10:41 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git. [ ... ] 2. Although I have paired my apache.org ID and my GitHub ID and it was confirmed a couple of months ago, I cannot do a Sync that pushes a small change from my computer to the GitHub repo. So I get that there is no good way to push to GitHub for this repo. [ ... ] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
Hi Pedro, I don't currently use git but what I use is not really important: if a move to git were to be considered, it would only make sense if we can rescue the pre-apache history and in particular the Hg CWSs. Most of the open-source history has been preserved. I talked about this in my last year's FOSDEM presentation [1]. The code history was provided a big git repository in a 2GB blob [2]. Unzip it and start your favorite git tool to explore it (e.g. gitk --all). [1] http://people.apache.org/~hdu/HistOOory_Presentation.pdf [2] http://people.apache.org/~hdu/HistOOory_lastest.zip Herbert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
Hello, personally I prefer Git. But this doens't matter Who do the administration of the core code like branch and merge and so on? These persons should get the best free tool being available. Kind regards Mechtilde Stehmann --- ## Apache OpenOffice.org ## Freie Office Suite für Linux, MacOSX, Windows ## PGP encryption welcome ## Key-ID 0x141AAD7F signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
Hi - In SVN you can choose parts of the repository. In Git it is all or none. If we move to GIT then please either leave both websites out of this move - or create separate git repositories for each. Also does Apache offer an SVN Mirror for GIT? Regards, Dave On Feb 13, 2015, at 11:10 PM, Mechtilde wrote: Hello, personally I prefer Git. But this doens't matter Who do the administration of the core code like branch and merge and so on? These persons should get the best free tool being available. Kind regards Mechtilde Stehmann --- ## Apache OpenOffice.org ## Freie Office Suite für Linux, MacOSX, Windows ## PGP encryption welcome ## Key-ID 0x141AAD7F - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
RE: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
Corinthia has its code tree (not web site) on Git. There is a mirror on GitHub as Apache/incubator-corinthia. Even then I was unable to do a push to the mirror although I went through the ceremony to pair my Apache ID and my GitHub ID. From that factoid, I have to conclude that all mirrors are read-only or my pairing is not working. I am not certain how to tell the difference. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org] Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 10:41 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git. [ ... ] 2. Although I have paired my apache.org ID and my GitHub ID and it was confirmed a couple of months ago, I cannot do a Sync that pushes a small change from my computer to the GitHub repo. So I get that there is no good way to push to GitHub for this repo. [ ... ] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
On 14 February 2015 at 22:27, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: Corinthia has its code tree (not web site) on Git. There is a mirror on GitHub as Apache/incubator-corinthia. Even then I was unable to do a push to the mirror although I went through the ceremony to pair my Apache ID and my GitHub ID. From that factoid, I have to conclude that all mirrors are read-only or my pairing is not working. I am not certain how to tell the difference. Well I did tell you earlieryou cannot push to a mirror, you have to push to the canonical repo (git://git.apache.org/incubator-corinthia.git) This is true for any GIT repo, and not only ASF. rgds jan I. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org] Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 10:41 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git. [ ... ] 2. Although I have paired my apache.org ID and my GitHub ID and it was confirmed a couple of months ago, I cannot do a Sync that pushes a small change from my computer to the GitHub repo. So I get that there is no good way to push to GitHub for this repo. [ ... ] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
[PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
Hi. We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo. Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new people) by lowering the barrier. For more documentation on Git at Apache see https://git-wip-us.apache.org/ Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean giving up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git instead. The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work. thoughts ? rgds jan I.
RE: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
I don’t understand the response. I said GitHub Mirror, which anyone can make a push request to from another GitHub repo (a GitHub fork) and from a clone of the Mirror not on GitHub. If I push a change to the OpenOffice Mirror on GitHub, won’t the pull of those changes show up in the AOO SVN and the AOO Git wherever it is (since I am a recognized ASF committer)? Is this not the easy case for newcomers? Is this not supported with the AOO Mirror on GitHub already? I also notice that the GitHub app will work with a local repo clone that is not from a GitHub repo as well (at least on Windows). That is how I push and pull with the incubator-corinthia repository on ASF infrastructure. If there are now more Git commits than SVN commits, don’t the pulls of those also end up in the SVN? I thought there was bidirectional synchronization. Can you please explain what doesn’t work already? Although I use the AOO SVN, I don’t think I miss any commits made via Git. How am I mistaken? Is this rather a concern for infrastructure server demand and performance? - Dennis From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org] Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 04:41 To: dev; Dennis Hamilton Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git. On 13 February 2015 at 13:13, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: Isn't having the mirror on GitHub an effective way to push changes to the SVN, especially for Apache committers who have project rights to the GitHub repo? Non-committer pull requests are as complicated either way, it seems to me, and the GitHub mirror might be superior for that. no it is not. You cannot push from github to either git or svn at apache. Please be aware that I wrote git, not github. ASF has its own git server, which is mandatory to use. I assume the proposal is do-able, but I wonder what kind of disruption cost there is for current work. Well it is not only do-able, at the moment about half of all ASF projects work that way. The disruption cost is an infra ticket, and about 3-4 hours downtime. We have today more git commits than svn commits. rgds jan i. - Dennis Below, I have no opinion, just wonder if these are also relevant considerations? PS: Our current SVN repo is also used for source control of openoffice.org http://openoffice.org , So I assume it is not a total give-up. Also, we have SVN tags and branches that might be problematic, I think. PPS: The AOO repo is also a bit larger than what Linus apparently thinks is cool. This gets back to how could the AOO repo be refactored in order to modularize the software and simplify (re-)building and staged evolution of features. -Original Message- From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org mailto:j...@apache.org ] Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 03:44 To: dev Subject: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git. Hi. We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo. Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new people) by lowering the barrier. For more documentation on Git at Apache see https://git-wip-us.apache.org/ Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean giving up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git instead. The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work. thoughts ? rgds jan I. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org mailto:dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org mailto:dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
On Friday, February 13, 2015, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: I don’t understand the response. I said GitHub Mirror, which anyone can make a push request to from another GitHub repo (a GitHub fork) and from a clone of the Mirror not on GitHub. If I push a change to the OpenOffice Mirror on GitHub, won’t the pull of those changes show up in the AOO SVN and the AOO Git wherever it is (since I am a recognized ASF committer)? no it will not,because it is a mirror and not the canocial repo. Is this not the easy case for newcomers? Is this not supported with the AOO Mirror on GitHub already? no it is not, fisrt of all our current mirror is read only. I also notice that the GitHub app will work with a local repo clone that is not from a GitHub repo as well (at least on Windows). That is how I push and pull with the incubator-corinthia repository on ASF infrastructure. If there are now more Git commits than SVN commits, don’t the pulls of those also end up in the SVN? I thought there was bidirectional synchronization. no there is not a bidirectional sync, it is either svn or git at the canocial repo. Can you please explain what doesn’t work already? Although I use the AOO SVN, I don’t think I miss any commits made via Git. How am I mistaken? may I please suggest you read the links I gave. Is this rather a concern for infrastructure server demand and performance? no idea what you mean. rgds jan I - Dennis From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org javascript:;] Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 04:41 To: dev; Dennis Hamilton Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git. On 13 February 2015 at 13:13, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org javascript:; mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org javascript:; wrote: Isn't having the mirror on GitHub an effective way to push changes to the SVN, especially for Apache committers who have project rights to the GitHub repo? Non-committer pull requests are as complicated either way, it seems to me, and the GitHub mirror might be superior for that. no it is not. You cannot push from github to either git or svn at apache. Please be aware that I wrote git, not github. ASF has its own git server, which is mandatory to use. I assume the proposal is do-able, but I wonder what kind of disruption cost there is for current work. Well it is not only do-able, at the moment about half of all ASF projects work that way. The disruption cost is an infra ticket, and about 3-4 hours downtime. We have today more git commits than svn commits. rgds jan i. - Dennis Below, I have no opinion, just wonder if these are also relevant considerations? PS: Our current SVN repo is also used for source control of openoffice.org http://openoffice.org , So I assume it is not a total give-up. Also, we have SVN tags and branches that might be problematic, I think. PPS: The AOO repo is also a bit larger than what Linus apparently thinks is cool. This gets back to how could the AOO repo be refactored in order to modularize the software and simplify (re-)building and staged evolution of features. -Original Message- From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org javascript:; mailto:j...@apache.org javascript:; ] Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 03:44 To: dev Subject: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git. Hi. We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo. Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new people) by lowering the barrier. For more documentation on Git at Apache see https://git-wip-us.apache.org/ Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean giving up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git instead. The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work. thoughts ? rgds jan I. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org javascript:; mailto:dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org javascript:; For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org javascript:; mailto:dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org javascript:; -- Sent from My iPad, sorry for any misspellings.
Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
Am 02/13/2015 06:13 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk: On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 3:43 AM, jan ij...@apache.org wrote: Hi. We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo. Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new people) by lowering the barrier. For more documentation on Git at Apache see https://git-wip-us.apache.org/ Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean giving up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git instead. The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work. thoughts ? rgds jan I. I'm not sure I understand the comment about making things easier but then I'm not a git user currently. I'm good with svn. I know we have read only git right now. I'm not a core developer but working here and there on the website. So, at least I don't need Git - of course that's not counting. ;-) However, does staging and publishing the website also work via Git? Regarding the argument to attract more new developers: I don't know if this is the reality as I haven't see any comment from newbies like If you would use Git I would start working or similar. So, I'm not sure if a change would give us more developers. When changing then it will be more because of technical reasons - like branching could be easier than in SVN. My 2 ct. Marcus - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
RE: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
OK, I finally cloned Apache/OpenOffice from GitHub. I learned two things: 1. The git repo takes just under 3GB on my hard drive. That's considerably less than the 4.35GB SVN working copy for the AOO SVN trunk. 2. Although I have paired my apache.org ID and my GitHub ID and it was confirmed a couple of months ago, I cannot do a Sync that pushes a small change from my computer to the GitHub repo. So I get that there is no good way to push to GitHub for this repo. 3. I also cloned and made a push to Apache/commons-cli and this also reported that I evidently do not have permission to do that. Am I to conclude that my pairing of IDs is failing or is it the case that all Apache repos on GitHub are read-only mirrors? As I said, I have no objection to the proposal and I have confirmed a problem that it definitely solves for committers at least. - Dennis -Original Message- From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org] Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 09:04 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; dennis.hamil...@acm.org Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git. On Friday, February 13, 2015, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: I don’t understand the response. I said GitHub Mirror, which anyone can make a push request to from another GitHub repo (a GitHub fork) and from a clone of the Mirror not on GitHub. If I push a change to the OpenOffice Mirror on GitHub, won’t the pull of those changes show up in the AOO SVN and the AOO Git wherever it is (since I am a recognized ASF committer)? no it will not,because it is a mirror and not the canocial repo. Is this not the easy case for newcomers? Is this not supported with the AOO Mirror on GitHub already? no it is not, fisrt of all our current mirror is read only. I also notice that the GitHub app will work with a local repo clone that is not from a GitHub repo as well (at least on Windows). That is how I push and pull with the incubator-corinthia repository on ASF infrastructure. If there are now more Git commits than SVN commits, don’t the pulls of those also end up in the SVN? I thought there was bidirectional synchronization. no there is not a bidirectional sync, it is either svn or git at the canocial repo. Can you please explain what doesn’t work already? Although I use the AOO SVN, I don’t think I miss any commits made via Git. How am I mistaken? may I please suggest you read the links I gave. Is this rather a concern for infrastructure server demand and performance? no idea what you mean. rgds jan I - Dennis From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org javascript:;] Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 04:41 To: dev; Dennis Hamilton Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git. On 13 February 2015 at 13:13, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org javascript:; mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org javascript:; wrote: Isn't having the mirror on GitHub an effective way to push changes to the SVN, especially for Apache committers who have project rights to the GitHub repo? Non-committer pull requests are as complicated either way, it seems to me, and the GitHub mirror might be superior for that. no it is not. You cannot push from github to either git or svn at apache. Please be aware that I wrote git, not github. ASF has its own git server, which is mandatory to use. I assume the proposal is do-able, but I wonder what kind of disruption cost there is for current work. Well it is not only do-able, at the moment about half of all ASF projects work that way. The disruption cost is an infra ticket, and about 3-4 hours downtime. We have today more git commits than svn commits. rgds jan i. - Dennis Below, I have no opinion, just wonder if these are also relevant considerations? PS: Our current SVN repo is also used for source control of openoffice.org http://openoffice.org , So I assume it is not a total give-up. Also, we have SVN tags and branches that might be problematic, I think. PPS: The AOO repo is also a bit larger than what Linus apparently thinks is cool. This gets back to how could the AOO repo be refactored in order to modularize the software and simplify (re-)building and staged evolution of features. -Original Message- From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org javascript:; mailto:j...@apache.org javascript:; ] Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 03:44 To: dev Subject: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git. Hi. We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo. Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new people) by lowering the barrier. For more documentation on Git at Apache see https://git-wip-us.apache.org/ Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean giving up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git instead. The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work. thoughts
Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
On 13 February 2015 at 18:13, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 3:43 AM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote: Hi. We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo. Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new people) by lowering the barrier. For more documentation on Git at Apache see https://git-wip-us.apache.org/ Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean giving up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git instead. The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work. thoughts ? rgds jan I. I'm not sure I understand the comment about making things easier but then I'm not a git user currently. I'm good with svn. I know we have read only git right now. I did not mean for you and me, and others who are used to svn...using GIT might make it just a little bit easier for new developers. I have no strong feelings for the one or other solution, I am simply seeing it as a possibility to lower the level required to help. rgds jan I. -- - MzK An old horse for a long, hard road, a young pony for a quick ride. -- Texas Bix Bender
Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
Hi Jan, jan i schrieb: Hi. We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo. Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new people) by lowering the barrier. For more documentation on Git at Apache see https://git-wip-us.apache.org/ Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean giving up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git instead. The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work. thoughts ? I do not think, that a move is needed. New developers without commit rights do not need it, because they create patches. I'm surely no professional developer and commit only patches from time to time. I use git svn and that works for me. Kind regards Regina - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
Hello; I don't currently use git but what I use is not really important: if a move to git were to be considered, it would only make sense if we can rescue the pre-apache history and in particular the Hg CWSs. Just my $0.02, Pedro. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 3:43 AM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote: Hi. We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo. Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new people) by lowering the barrier. For more documentation on Git at Apache see https://git-wip-us.apache.org/ Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean giving up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git instead. The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work. thoughts ? rgds jan I. I'm not sure I understand the comment about making things easier but then I'm not a git user currently. I'm good with svn. I know we have read only git right now. -- - MzK An old horse for a long, hard road, a young pony for a quick ride. -- Texas Bix Bender
Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
I think is a good idea to use Git as a full fledge repo. +1 On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 12:13 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 3:43 AM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote: Hi. We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo. Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new people) by lowering the barrier. For more documentation on Git at Apache see https://git-wip-us.apache.org/ Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean giving up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git instead. The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work. thoughts ? rgds jan I. I'm not sure I understand the comment about making things easier but then I'm not a git user currently. I'm good with svn. I know we have read only git right now. -- - MzK An old horse for a long, hard road, a young pony for a quick ride. -- Texas Bix Bender -- Alexandro Colorado Apache OpenOffice Contributor 882C 4389 3C27 E8DF 41B9 5C4C 1DB7 9D1C 7F4C 2614
RE: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
Isn't having the mirror on GitHub an effective way to push changes to the SVN, especially for Apache committers who have project rights to the GitHub repo? Non-committer pull requests are as complicated either way, it seems to me, and the GitHub mirror might be superior for that. I assume the proposal is do-able, but I wonder what kind of disruption cost there is for current work. - Dennis Below, I have no opinion, just wonder if these are also relevant considerations? PS: Our current SVN repo is also used for source control of openoffice.org, So I assume it is not a total give-up. Also, we have SVN tags and branches that might be problematic, I think. PPS: The AOO repo is also a bit larger than what Linus apparently thinks is cool. This gets back to how could the AOO repo be refactored in order to modularize the software and simplify (re-)building and staged evolution of features. -Original Message- From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org] Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 03:44 To: dev Subject: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git. Hi. We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo. Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new people) by lowering the barrier. For more documentation on Git at Apache see https://git-wip-us.apache.org/ Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean giving up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git instead. The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work. thoughts ? rgds jan I. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git.
On 13 February 2015 at 13:13, Dennis E. Hamilton dennis.hamil...@acm.org wrote: Isn't having the mirror on GitHub an effective way to push changes to the SVN, especially for Apache committers who have project rights to the GitHub repo? Non-committer pull requests are as complicated either way, it seems to me, and the GitHub mirror might be superior for that. no it is not. You cannot push from github to either git or svn at apache. Please be aware that I wrote git, not github. ASF has its own git server, which is mandatory to use. I assume the proposal is do-able, but I wonder what kind of disruption cost there is for current work. Well it is not only do-able, at the moment about half of all ASF projects work that way. The disruption cost is an infra ticket, and about 3-4 hours downtime. We have today more git commits than svn commits. rgds jan i. - Dennis Below, I have no opinion, just wonder if these are also relevant considerations? PS: Our current SVN repo is also used for source control of openoffice.org, So I assume it is not a total give-up. Also, we have SVN tags and branches that might be problematic, I think. PPS: The AOO repo is also a bit larger than what Linus apparently thinks is cool. This gets back to how could the AOO repo be refactored in order to modularize the software and simplify (re-)building and staged evolution of features. -Original Message- From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org] Sent: Friday, February 13, 2015 03:44 To: dev Subject: [PROPOSAL] move repo to Git. Hi. We have now for a while had a readonly Git copy of our svn repo. Should we move to a full git repo, making it easier for new developers to participate (although it is in no way a guarantee, that it will attract new people) by lowering the barrier. For more documentation on Git at Apache see https://git-wip-us.apache.org/ Moving to a full git repo (see http://git.apache.org/), would mean giving up our current SVN repo, but history etc. will be available in Git instead. The choice is there, and it is just a matter of how people want to work. thoughts ? rgds jan I. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
