Re: [OpenSIPS-Devel] [OpenSIPS-Users] [RFC] migration to GIT
When comes to SF versus GITHUB - the main problem from my perspective is that SF overs a unified (one account) for tracker, forums, downloads, code repo.If we move code repo to GITHUB, we will force the developer to use 2 accounts (on SF for tracker, forum , etc, and one on GITHUB for GIT only).. I guess my original suggestion was not clear then :-) I was suggesting to completely move from SF. Just add a pointer to GH. For manageability reasons I would prefer to have a place hosting everything. Agreed. What options I see: 1) move everything (tracker + GIT and the rest ?) on GITHUB What would the rest be? 2) keep SF as primary GIT repo and GITHUB can be a secondary. Developers can use the SF accounts for everything and use GITHUB as an interface to the community (changes, pull requests, etc).. The problem I see here is that there would be a split so it could potentially be confusing. When a user sends a pull request, and issue is automatically created, so there would be two places for issues :-S Having GitHub not as the primary repo is not so nice because pull requests can't be disabled, so people could think that that is the place to contribute code :-S So, I think the two choices become: - Move everything to GH and have a read-only mirror somewhere (SF, BitBucket, self hosted, ...) - Stick to SF Personally I'd go for GitHub. In case there is anything I can do to help, whatever the choice is, don't hesitate to ask :-) Regards, -- Saúl Ibarra Corretgé AG Projects ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [OpenSIPS-Devel] [OpenSIPS-Users] [RFC] migration to GIT
On 02/19/2013 02:36 PM, Saúl Ibarra Corretgé wrote: When comes to SF versus GITHUB - the main problem from my perspective is that SF overs a unified (one account) for tracker, forums, downloads, code repo.If we move code repo to GITHUB, we will force the developer to use 2 accounts (on SF for tracker, forum , etc, and one on GITHUB for GIT only).. I guess my original suggestion was not clear then :-) I was suggesting to completely move from SF. Just add a pointer to GH. For manageability reasons I would prefer to have a place hosting everything. Agreed. What options I see: 1) move everything (tracker + GIT and the rest ?) on GITHUB What would the rest be? 2) keep SF as primary GIT repo and GITHUB can be a secondary. Developers can use the SF accounts for everything and use GITHUB as an interface to the community (changes, pull requests, etc).. The problem I see here is that there would be a split so it could potentially be confusing. When a user sends a pull request, and issue is automatically created, so there would be two places for issues :-S Having GitHub not as the primary repo is not so nice because pull requests can't be disabled, so people could think that that is the place to contribute code :-S So, I think the two choices become: - Move everything to GH and have a read-only mirror somewhere (SF, BitBucket, self hosted, ...) - Stick to SF Personally I'd go for GitHub. In case there is anything I can do to help, whatever the choice is, don't hesitate to ask :-) Currently, what we use from SF : - code repository - file download system - trackers (bugs, patches, features) - news system - donation system - forums could all these be replaced kept while moving to GH ? I mean is GH a platform for complete hosting of projects ? Regards, Bogdan ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [OpenSIPS-Devel] [OpenSIPS-Users] [RFC] migration to GIT
2013/2/18 Bogdan-Andrei Iancu bog...@opensips.org: Hi all, I would like to get some suggestions and help on the matter of migrating the code repository from SVN to GIT - the fact that such migration will bring value is for sure :) YES! YES! YES! -- With best regards, Peter Lemenkov. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [OpenSIPS-Devel] [OpenSIPS-Users] [RFC] migration to GIT
Hi Bogdan, On Feb 18, 2013, at 5:05 PM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu wrote: Hi all, I would like to get some suggestions and help on the matter of migrating the code repository from SVN to GIT - the fact that such migration will bring value is for sure :) I'm glad to see this happening. Count me in for helping as much as I can. What things need to be sorted out when moving to GIT: First question: would it be a self-hosted Git repository or the GitHub service? 1) for backward compatibility, I would suggest having a Read-Only SVN, so people will be able to update their current SVN checkouts. Does any of you have experience in mirroring (GIT to SVN only) data ? If GitHub is chosen it already provides this, so there is nothing to be done: https://github.com/blog/1178-collaborating-on-github-with-subversion 2) about the hooks in GIT - we have now the scripts for sending email on each SVN commits - some help in this matter will be highly appreciated. I don't know myself, but shouldn't be too hard to do. 3) we are heavily using the SVN keywords (%id%, etc) - is there a way to keep something similar in GIT ? Ditto. Also, we should keep the svn authors mapped to git authors where possible. I will appreciate any help from any GIT expert around here, just to be sure we get the things in the right way from the beginning :). Not a git super expert, but I have maintained a unofficial OpenSIPS repo for a while: https://github.com/saghul/OpenSIPS Since I'm here, let me elaborate on why I think moving to GitHub is a good idea: - Pull requests. That's it. Pull requests are the perfect way to collaborate with the project. Only people who actively contribute need commit rights, the rest can send a pull request with their changes just fine. Inline commenting is awesome, it's a very good way to iterate on a bugfix without sending diffs left and right, making code reviews very simple. GitHub also has an issue tracker, so existing issues can be migrated there. This would also help remove all sorts of old issues that have piled up over time ;-) Regards, -- Saúl Ibarra Corretgé AG Projects ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [OpenSIPS-Devel] [OpenSIPS-Users] [RFC] migration to GIT
2013/2/18 Saúl Ibarra Corretgé s...@ag-projects.com: What things need to be sorted out when moving to GIT: First question: would it be a self-hosted Git repository or the GitHub service? Why can't we have both? I personally don't see any issues here - It's possible to setup a primary repo at SF and secondary at GitHub. To be honest I'd prefer GitHub. Also I'd like to propose a switch to a new issue tracker at SF.net. Just compare that one we have to use now with the newest one: * http://sourceforge.net/p/sipp/bugs/ * http://sourceforge.net/p/curl/bugs/ -- With best regards, Peter Lemenkov. ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [OpenSIPS-Devel] [OpenSIPS-Users] [RFC] migration to GIT
On Feb 18, 2013, at 6:14 PM, Peter Lemenkov wrote: 2013/2/18 Saúl Ibarra Corretgé s...@ag-projects.com: Also I'd like to propose a switch to a new issue tracker at SF.net. Just compare that one we have to use now with the newest one: * http://sourceforge.net/p/sipp/bugs/ * http://sourceforge.net/p/curl/bugs/ Does the new tracker have anything like the pull requests mechanism? No, it doesn't. But it's still much better than the current one. Right. Personally, the main reason for going with GitHub and having the issue tracker there is how simple it is for people to contribute thanks to the powerful pull-requests feature. Not to mention that it encourages code reviews, which should in turn increase code quality. -- Saúl Ibarra Corretgé AG Projects ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [OpenSIPS-Devel] [OpenSIPS-Users] [RFC] migration to GIT
Hi Saul, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu OpenSIPS Founder and Developer http://www.opensips-solutions.com On 02/18/2013 06:20 PM, Saúl Ibarra Corretgé wrote: What things need to be sorted out when moving to GIT: First question: would it be a self-hosted Git repository or the GitHub service? 1) for backward compatibility, I would suggest having a Read-Only SVN, so people will be able to update their current SVN checkouts. Does any of you have experience in mirroring (GIT to SVN only) data ? If GitHub is chosen it already provides this, so there is nothing to be done: https://github.com/blog/1178-collaborating-on-github-with-subversion 2) about the hooks in GIT - we have now the scripts for sending email on each SVN commits - some help in this matter will be highly appreciated. I don't know myself, but shouldn't be too hard to do. 3) we are heavily using the SVN keywords (%id%, etc) - is there a way to keep something similar in GIT ? Ditto. Also, we should keep the svn authors mapped to git authors where possible. I will appreciate any help from any GIT expert around here, just to be sure we get the things in the right way from the beginning :). Not a git super expert, but I have maintained a unofficial OpenSIPS repo for a while: https://github.com/saghul/OpenSIPS Since I'm here, let me elaborate on why I think moving to GitHub is a good idea: - Pull requests. That's it. Pull requests are the perfect way to collaborate with the project. Only people who actively contribute need commit rights, the rest can send a pull request with their changes just fine. Inline commenting is awesome, it's a very good way to iterate on a bugfix without sending diffs left and right, making code reviews very simple. GitHub also has an issue tracker, so existing issues can be migrated there. This would also help remove all sorts of old issues that have piled up over time ;-) When comes to SF versus GITHUB - the main problem from my perspective is that SF overs a unified (one account) for tracker, forums, downloads, code repo.If we move code repo to GITHUB, we will force the developer to use 2 accounts (on SF for tracker, forum , etc, and one on GITHUB for GIT only).. For manageability reasons I would prefer to have a place hosting everything. What options I see: 1) move everything (tracker + GIT and the rest ?) on GITHUB 2) keep SF as primary GIT repo and GITHUB can be a secondary. Developers can use the SF accounts for everything and use GITHUB as an interface to the community (changes, pull requests, etc).. If I'm talking BS, please correct me :D. Regards, Bogdan ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [OpenSIPS-Devel] [OpenSIPS-Users] [RFC] migration to GIT
Hi Peter, On 02/18/2013 06:52 PM, Peter Lemenkov wrote: 2013/2/18 Saúl Ibarra Corretgés...@ag-projects.com: What things need to be sorted out when moving to GIT: First question: would it be a self-hosted Git repository or the GitHub service? Why can't we have both? I personally don't see any issues here - It's possible to setup a primary repo at SF and secondary at GitHub. To be honest I'd prefer GitHub. Also I'd like to propose a switch to a new issue tracker at SF.net. Just compare that one we have to use now with the newest one: * http://sourceforge.net/p/sipp/bugs/ * http://sourceforge.net/p/curl/bugs/ SF anyhow forces us to do an upgrade (for the platform they are using) - see https://sourceforge.net/p/upgrade?search=opensips -, so we could check how the new tracker looks like and what other new options they have for it. Regards, Bogdan ___ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
