Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming changes to hosting of Git repos on git.gentoo.org (NOT overlays.git.gentoo.org)
On Saturday 22 January 2011 20:06:06 Sebastian Pipping wrote: On 01/22/11 13:32, Theo Chatzimichos wrote: Well, the distinction for unofficial/official overlays happen mostly in layman -L, I don't think users pay attention to our git repo list. Furthermore, I got at least three requests from developers to move their repo from user/ to dev/ (same problem when devs retired). This distinction doesn't make any sense. Three request over what time? Compared to a screen height of user repos created, maybe that's not much. Sebastian I'm sorry I don't share your point. I think I was quite clear, the user/developer distinction (or better, the unofficial/official overlay) should happen in layman list and in overlays website, not in gitolite. Take a look at the current list in gitweb and tell me honestly how clear and distinct is that thing for you. For the record: the following overlays should move from dev/ to user/: b33fc0d3, hawking, uberlord, welp the following should move from user/ to dev/: dilfridge at least two people with user/ overlays are going to be gentoo devs soon and last but not least, smithdanea overlay is useless because c1pher has a dev overlay as well now not to mention the proj/ list. And now, imagine the state of the user/ dev/ list mess in, say, two or five years -- Theo Chatzimichos (tampakrap) Gentoo KDE/Qt, Planet, Overlays signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming changes to hosting of Git repos on git.gentoo.org (NOT overlays.git.gentoo.org)
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 12:02:16AM +0200, Theo Chatzimichos wrote: And now, imagine the state of the user/ dev/ list mess in, say, two or five years So you're in favour of making it 'people/' and just distinguishing in the descriptions and Layman? -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux: Developer, Trustee Infrastructure Lead E-Mail : robb...@gentoo.org GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85 pgpvVuVxDow1z.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming changes to hosting of Git repos on git.gentoo.org (NOT overlays.git.gentoo.org)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dne 25.1.2011 23:08, Robin H. Johnson napsal(a): On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 12:02:16AM +0200, Theo Chatzimichos wrote: And now, imagine the state of the user/ dev/ list mess in, say, two or five years So you're in favour of making it 'people/' and just distinguishing in the descriptions and Layman? Could you guys do it like mammals/ Kthx :) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk0/SrsACgkQHB6c3gNBRYc6aQCgnWhn+TpaL2ZridSW21wernJL ZQIAoKhqrbD28kGr4BtV/kBRIGAVhsm7 =AU/O -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming changes to hosting of Git repos on git.gentoo.org (NOT overlays.git.gentoo.org)
like on the discovery channel? -A 2011/1/25 Tomáš Chvátal scarab...@gentoo.org: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dne 25.1.2011 23:08, Robin H. Johnson napsal(a): On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 12:02:16AM +0200, Theo Chatzimichos wrote: And now, imagine the state of the user/ dev/ list mess in, say, two or five years So you're in favour of making it 'people/' and just distinguishing in the descriptions and Layman? Could you guys do it like mammals/ Kthx :) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk0/SrsACgkQHB6c3gNBRYc6aQCgnWhn+TpaL2ZridSW21wernJL ZQIAoKhqrbD28kGr4BtV/kBRIGAVhsm7 =AU/O -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming changes to hosting of Git repos on git.gentoo.org (NOT overlays.git.gentoo.org)
On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 04:38:49AM +0200, Theo Chatzimichos wrote: Assuming we're going to move the git.overlays.gentoo.org repos there as well in the near future, this is the structure i am proposing: Yes, they will be merging, but not for many months. What _DO_ need, is getting the namespaces to be identical as soon as possible, and preventing namespace collisions for anything that gets added. Two overall comments about your proposal. 1. We EXPLICITLY need a location for private repositories. - infra: for critical system data [1] - foundation: for legal tracking, personal, financial information - PR project: I don't know what they have in there. I've never looked at their private repo. The current breakdown of private repos: Infra: 2 Foundation: 0, but 2 requested PR: 1 source - portage-main.git - portage-history.git infra (or sysadmin) - (repo1).git - (repo2).git - ... - I don't think that infra should be a toplevel here. As much as we intend to use repos, this is pollution of the namespace. overlay - project (instead of proj) - sunrise.git - kde.git - ... - personal (merge dev/ user/) - aballier.git - alexxy.git - ... - Some of the developer+user repos are NOT overlays, but Gentoo-specific code/applications. - On one hand, I would like user repositories to have a separate namespace, so that other users realize a given repo is NOT from a developer. - On the other side, what do we do when a user with a repo becomes a developer (and when they retire?) website - blogs.git - planet.git - forums.git - gstats.git - packages.git - www.git (the gentoo cvs repo) - ... These are projects, why not include them there? project (includes SOC projects, forks, gentoo projects etc) - devmanual.git - portage.git - ... devmanual IS a website... How are you differentiating project vs. website? [1] We intend on having public infra repos as well, and just having the fewest private repos. -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux: Developer, Trustee Infrastructure Lead E-Mail : robb...@gentoo.org GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85
Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming changes to hosting of Git repos on git.gentoo.org (NOT overlays.git.gentoo.org)
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 22:20:27 -0600 Donnie Berkholz dberkh...@gentoo.org wrote: I don't see any particular reason to distinguish between the main tree and overlays in this structure. Just do something common for both, like tree/ or ebuilds/ or packages/. Yeah, that'd be a good idea for the concept of repositories. - repos/project/gentoo.git - repos/project/sunrise.git etc. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming changes to hosting of Git repos on git.gentoo.org (NOT overlays.git.gentoo.org)
On Saturday 22 January 2011 10:55:19 Robin H. Johnson wrote: 1. We EXPLICITLY need a location for private repositories. didn't know that, so i guess the private dir should be: private - infra - (infrapriv1).git - (infrapriv2).git - foundation - (foundpriv1).git - (foundpriv2).git - pr - - Some of the developer+user repos are NOT overlays, but Gentoo-specific code/applications. These DON'T belong here, they should go to project/ - On one hand, I would like user repositories to have a separate namespace, so that other users realize a given repo is NOT from a developer. - On the other side, what do we do when a user with a repo becomes a developer (and when they retire?) Well, the distinction for unofficial/official overlays happen mostly in layman -L, I don't think users pay attention to our git repo list. Furthermore, I got at least three requests from developers to move their repo from user/ to dev/ (same problem when devs retired). This distinction doesn't make any sense. These are projects, why not include them there? All of the above are *.gentoo.org subdomains project (includes SOC projects, forks, gentoo projects etc) - devmanual.git - portage.git - ... devmanual IS a website... How are you differentiating project vs. website? devmanual should go to website/, you are right. In project/ belongs anything that is not a *.g.o subdomain, and is not an overlay (SOC projects, upstream projects (portage, gorg, rbot*, znurt), forks (gitolite-gentoo)) [1] We intend on having public infra repos as well, and just having the fewest private repos. Send them to project/ as well ;) -- Theo Chatzimichos (tampakrap) Gentoo KDE/Qt, Planet, Overlays signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming changes to hosting of Git repos on git.gentoo.org (NOT overlays.git.gentoo.org)
On Saturday 22 January 2011 06:20:27 Donnie Berkholz wrote: I don't see any particular reason to distinguish between the main tree and overlays in this structure. Just do something common for both, like tree/ or ebuilds/ or packages/. In the same vein, there's no good reason I can think of to discriminate between overlays that are project vs personal, since either can be supported or unsupported. And I don't see a reason to merge the huge overlays list with the official gentoo tree. They are totally different things, and a future alternative to viewvc in sources.gentoo.org (maybe trac-git) should reflect that. If we show a huge list with ebuild repos to public (especially to new to gentoo) without separating the official tree (including user/unofficial/bad-shaped ones), I suppose we'll give the impression we are like debian, where the user needs the multimedia overlay to get multimedia ebuilds, or the kde overlay to install kde. For the second part of your question, Ryan's responce is perfect. -- Theo Chatzimichos (tampakrap) Gentoo KDE/Qt, Planet, Overlays signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming changes to hosting of Git repos on git.gentoo.org (NOT overlays.git.gentoo.org)
Hi all! Why not use redmine as sources.gentoo.org? 2011/1/22 Theo Chatzimichos tampak...@gentoo.org: On Saturday 22 January 2011 06:20:27 Donnie Berkholz wrote: I don't see any particular reason to distinguish between the main tree and overlays in this structure. Just do something common for both, like tree/ or ebuilds/ or packages/. In the same vein, there's no good reason I can think of to discriminate between overlays that are project vs personal, since either can be supported or unsupported. And I don't see a reason to merge the huge overlays list with the official gentoo tree. They are totally different things, and a future alternative to viewvc in sources.gentoo.org (maybe trac-git) should reflect that. If we show a huge list with ebuild repos to public (especially to new to gentoo) without separating the official tree (including user/unofficial/bad-shaped ones), I suppose we'll give the impression we are like debian, where the user needs the multimedia overlay to get multimedia ebuilds, or the kde overlay to install kde. For the second part of your question, Ryan's responce is perfect. -- Theo Chatzimichos (tampakrap) Gentoo KDE/Qt, Planet, Overlays -- Best Regards, Alexey 'Alexxy' Shvetsov Petersburg Nuclear Physics Institute, Russia Department of Molecular and Radiation Biophysics Gentoo Team Ru Gentoo Linux Dev mailto:alexx...@gmail.com mailto:ale...@gentoo.org mailto:ale...@omrb.pnpi.spb.ru
Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming changes to hosting of Git repos on git.gentoo.org (NOT overlays.git.gentoo.org)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 22-01-2011 03:20, Donnie Berkholz wrote: On 04:38 Sat 22 Jan , Theo Chatzimichos wrote: Assuming we're going to move the git.overlays.gentoo.org repos there as well in the near future, this is the structure i am proposing: source - portage-main.git - portage-history.git ... overlay - project (instead of proj) - sunrise.git - kde.git - ... - personal (merge dev/ user/) - aballier.git - alexxy.git - ... I don't see any particular reason to distinguish between the main tree and overlays in this structure. Just do something common for both, like tree/ or ebuilds/ or packages/. In the same vein, there's no good reason I can think of to discriminate between overlays that are project vs personal, since either can be supported or unsupported. I think a distinction between tree and project overlays can be useful in case we ever consider splitting the main tree. In that case, our new tree would be composed of all the split repos under tree and users would have an easy way to distinguish between the tree and project overlays. We could even provide the ability for users to have just some of the split repos and thus not require the complete tree. - -- Regards, Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org Gentoo- forums / Userrel / Devrel / KDE / Elections / RelEng -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJNOvOLAAoJEC8ZTXQF1qEP924P/2dbxlK8m3y0k4/ArQojeJH7 9HY3NzMImIuIW44kcdGhEj6+bJDEPGTz1Pb1zGrNMSxNYgrxrXYkEKEWldNYszm7 TNqQvm+Pl9D39ckjjDzV+zMfKZQn9UtM3MCTOw4ozWZynSLGajkpZK6Cp4BIiOjF JiPi+Q8zSw/Xc8umLxK4ZfWy4n4WhLDbJgxO8ws+s27iSlQemJhqlOmCw1nMAcyB FPlf1cyMa0MxUStqHWzJ0MBtYOfkxoSNvnXAoVl47DGPbOagdSSWkbbmx5p6vn2C HpJ/xNfJkDoPa6DPrbBdQtmiay3A72fkokwLSFKMvNhMjDMeMhR30IPxDkrRf/ls faIK7FKeJbh/sWr0XgBVR5rsASSQkor647DbjT04/v+g9HN/bB9IxmYY9hVC66aw +j0gph07zTuXUAHDcqqSnMxlr3MGril+mAVXf+ne2N6emrP88K2plnSGc5LmUfyy i+eEfb5UBTxfBfmyollKArVS9djzKveKLiVgIn1ga6kyj7JGYiDZnJTOfHJ1sfdc R8dti5qyqQUruzmjkEeGQEMBpawIh/ZYY3LDfh7MaDkLjLScdVUHgZDipn+QjIUx lliDjRK5sa1S4WWojK0t/gd3ikW/YrXQRHpLo9EOtMzkRfR9FSbFv+ew8ud5RlyN eIQrF7smR0LCOMF1/mzj =ytaq -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming changes to hosting of Git repos on git.gentoo.org (NOT overlays.git.gentoo.org)
On Saturday 22 January 2011 16:58:38 Alexey Shvetsov wrote: Hi all! Why not use redmine as sources.gentoo.org? idl0r installed trac-git for git.overlays, it needs some testing before starting to redesign the overlays webpages (ETA 1 month due to my exams) If we decide that it doesn't suit our needs we'll proceed in trying something else, but this is totally offtopic, please stick to the topic. -- Theo Chatzimichos (tampakrap) Gentoo KDE/Qt, Planet, Overlays signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming changes to hosting of Git repos on git.gentoo.org (NOT overlays.git.gentoo.org)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 22-01-2011 11:32, Theo Chatzimichos wrote: On Saturday 22 January 2011 10:55:19 Robin H. Johnson wrote: 1. We EXPLICITLY need a location for private repositories. didn't know that, so i guess the private dir should be: private - infra - (infrapriv1).git - (infrapriv2).git - foundation - (foundpriv1).git - (foundpriv2).git - pr - - Some of the developer+user repos are NOT overlays, but Gentoo-specific code/applications. These DON'T belong here, they should go to project/ Why not provide a tree for overlays and another for application repositories? - On one hand, I would like user repositories to have a separate namespace, so that other users realize a given repo is NOT from a developer. - On the other side, what do we do when a user with a repo becomes a developer (and when they retire?) Well, the distinction for unofficial/official overlays happen mostly in layman -L, I don't think users pay attention to our git repo list. Furthermore, I got at least three requests from developers to move their repo from user/ to dev/ (same problem when devs retired). This distinction doesn't make any sense. Instead of relying on the name space for such a distinction, I propose we use a label for that. Preferably we should have an automatic system to produce the label and have it present on any online repo browsers (gitweb?) and on project management apps (redmine?) so that users have no doubt when looking at projects.gentoo.org / overlays.gentoo.org about the type of a repo. The label to distinguish between developers and non-developers repos could take advantage of the ldap info. We could also use labels for the status of a project like we're already doing on layman. With the above in mind and some of the suggestions in the other emails, what about the following structure: tree - core-portage-tree.git - core-portage-historical-tree.git (possibly some day) - gnome.git - kde.git - sci.git - x11.git (split profiles, keywords(?)) - profiles.git overlay - project (do we want to support non-gentoo projects?) . gnome.git . kde.git . sci.git . sunrise.git . external project a* . ... - individual (we need to decide whether we want to host and the legal costs of hosting non-gentoo individual's or project's repos) . aballier.git . alexxy.git . user a* . ... project - pages (project web pages, but not applications code source like forums, blogs or PMS) . main-site.git (split from the current gentoo repo) . gentoo-project.git (should we split the current gentoo repo?) . devmanual.git - repositories . project (tied to projects) ^ gentoo-forums.git ^ gentoo-blogs.git ^ gitolite-gentoo ^ gstats.git ^ packages.git ^ planet.git ^ portage.git ^ pms.git ^ releng.git . individual (work of one or more individuals not tied to any projects) ^ portage-utils.git (not tied to any project afaik) ^ layman.git ^ rbot-gentoo (is it tied to any project?) ^ cool new toy for Gentoo done by devs A and B ^ soc (include individual soc projects here) (would it make sense to organize by year?) ' soc project 1 ' soc project 2 private - foundation . legal . finances . ... - infra . infra 1 . infra 2 . ... - pr . pr 1 . pr 2 . ... This design includes 4 top-level labels: tree, overlay, project and private: * the tree sub-tree should be used for the Portage tree, it's history and any future trees we choose to have. * the overlay sub-tree should be used to host repositories to be used as overlays. * the project sub-tree should be used to host the web pages and sites and all the repositories for applications / tools. * the private sub-tree should be used for private repositories that cannot be exposed to the public. - -- Regards, Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org Gentoo- forums / Userrel / Devrel / KDE / Elections / RelEng -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJNOv+zAAoJEC8ZTXQF1qEPp9EP/AvFRbVsYQHcik4PMMFdwHPO 3vCXl2M0JENah/HBIM7cMigt1KWmk8jPJ4QOdARnFb2rVy9nDbycIzKYhHotg/aO Bh7euJdLj1jxI3DKz1kZCj++DXQyZ0clzBde/c+sYWfw/1bGruRuZoAqr5Tbtkd4 4h6YV2bCHgeJUjUpC/7+K6M1/UNW7MwhdJC9cViLXyZ+O04fGSNZ5g/V7CCQtrE4 oMDodPgmfjwdmp9AqsA6ejVswkhuMbL8KyHS3kEBQXABugQpGnwVnY48KI2oi0yv 4oqa6cv+A6F9hoSrfHk9dytMdegAHtuFmq/70nnLBwVvljrdyGackAJj51oAtLgW 6tZDOGp6ZsjzsruSS3Keh4V2wFRz7Uejjkhkn/QuYMO86QyX3QA0eN9dce/HuOEv zpbgZf3qvVvZ/zFnJw48sYNogfeb+CSQqs1pqRCjLwhShg1TcrBYYldiRvhxKNXl SNBBUQDKSiorLGLnM6T23QEH/hEoVVjH6Z6D/09F0MODpwdv0H+iMJkUIGg1iv7G WladznFgBg/gHjLB15Aq0Ux7eGwd6uoJ1Mm3zt0KbuO14udYgAbW6JvLw2JF7DSV Y5njptBYPTUHx7Oj15LtzrN6RUQMnN/fLM8/VoBVrSb5dnXIdYWwCerL3JzkFsiH
Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming changes to hosting of Git repos on git.gentoo.org (NOT overlays.git.gentoo.org)
On Saturday 22 January 2011 18:02:59 Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote: Why not provide a tree for overlays and another for application repositories? You just repeated my proposal, with the only difference I splitted project from website :P -- Theo Chatzimichos (tampakrap) Gentoo KDE/Qt, Planet, Overlays signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming changes to hosting of Git repos on git.gentoo.org (NOT overlays.git.gentoo.org)
On 01/22/11 13:32, Theo Chatzimichos wrote: Well, the distinction for unofficial/official overlays happen mostly in layman -L, I don't think users pay attention to our git repo list. Furthermore, I got at least three requests from developers to move their repo from user/ to dev/ (same problem when devs retired). This distinction doesn't make any sense. Three request over what time? Compared to a screen height of user repos created, maybe that's not much. Sebastian
Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming changes to hosting of Git repos on git.gentoo.org (NOT overlays.git.gentoo.org)
On 01/22/11 09:55, Robin H. Johnson wrote: - On one hand, I would like user repositories to have a separate namespace, so that other users realize a given repo is NOT from a developer. Seconding that. - On the other side, what do we do when a user with a repo becomes a developer (and when they retire?) To avoid a move, you'd have to give away distinction. To be able to do path-based distinction, you have to move on status updates. It seems that you cannot have both at the same time. Sebastian
Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming changes to hosting of Git repos on git.gentoo.org (NOT overlays.git.gentoo.org)
On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 03:02:59PM -0100, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote: Well, the distinction for unofficial/official overlays happen mostly in layman -L, I don't think users pay attention to our git repo list. Furthermore, I got at least three requests from developers to move their repo from user/ to dev/ (same problem when devs retired). This distinction doesn't make any sense. Instead of relying on the name space for such a distinction, I propose we use a label for that. Preferably we should have an automatic system to produce the label and have it present on any online repo browsers (gitweb?) and on project management apps (redmine?) so that users have no doubt when looking at projects.gentoo.org / overlays.gentoo.org about the type of a repo. The label to distinguish between developers and non-developers repos could take advantage of the ldap info. We could also use labels for the status of a project like we're already doing on layman. The existence of labels is completely irrelevant to the actual PATH to the repos, of which there can be only one, and changing it later is going to upset people. -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux: Developer, Trustee Infrastructure Lead E-Mail : robb...@gentoo.org GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85
Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming changes to hosting of Git repos on git.gentoo.org (NOT overlays.git.gentoo.org)
On 21:56 Fri 21 Jan , Sebastian Pipping wrote: On 01/21/11 21:35, Robin H. Johnson wrote: gentoo-portage.git [2] gentoo-portage-historical.git [2] [..] [2] This is an idea where I'd like to place the main tree, and the additional graftable tree with the full history. I'm not entirely happy with this location, and WELCOME suggestions to improve it. I would prefer something like gentoo-main or main-tree over gentoo-portage as could would help reducing the problem of mixing up our main tree and one of our package managers. If it actually is the main tree, why not put that in the name. Thanks for consideration. Sweet, we actually got an invitation to bikeshed! Here's my contributions: gentoo-tree.git gentoo-portage-tree.git portage-tree.git (the name 'portage' derives from bsd ports, so it makes sense to keep that connection to make it recognizable to that audience) -- Thanks, Donnie Donnie Berkholz Sr. Developer, Gentoo Linux Blog: http://dberkholz.com pgp6knDsYSf2N.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming changes to hosting of Git repos on git.gentoo.org (NOT overlays.git.gentoo.org)
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 03:47:03PM -0600, Donnie Berkholz wrote: Sweet, we actually got an invitation to bikeshed! Here's my contributions: gentoo-tree.git gentoo-portage-tree.git portage-tree.git (the name 'portage' derives from bsd ports, so it makes sense to keep that connection to make it recognizable to that audience) Please note that I said _location_. I'm not so happy about putting them in in the toplevel namespace. You need to provide TWO names: 1. The current tree that we will start with. 2. The read-only graftable tree with full history (going back to the start of Gentoo commits). As much as I like the original Portage tree, I do agree it's lead to confusing of the source code of the package manager vs. the ebuild tree. -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux: Developer, Trustee Infrastructure Lead E-Mail : robb...@gentoo.org GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85
Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming changes to hosting of Git repos on git.gentoo.org (NOT overlays.git.gentoo.org)
On 01/21/11 23:15, Robin H. Johnson wrote: On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 03:47:03PM -0600, Donnie Berkholz wrote: Sweet, we actually got an invitation to bikeshed! Here's my contributions: gentoo-tree.git gentoo-portage-tree.git portage-tree.git (the name 'portage' derives from bsd ports, so it makes sense to keep that connection to make it recognizable to that audience) Please note that I said _location_. I'm not so happy about putting them in in the toplevel namespace. I see. If the long-term goal is too have multiple packages trees, than maybe tree/main.git or tree/core.git would make sense and go well with proj/, as that is not plural either: no projs/, no trees/. It could make tree/core.git tree/science.git tree/games.git tree/... some day. You need to provide TWO names: 1. The current tree that we will start with. 2. The read-only graftable tree with full history (going back to the start of Gentoo commits). Any of these suffixes for the other one would work for me: * past * before * old * history historical is fine, just a bit long, maybe without need to. As much as I like the original Portage tree, I do agree it's lead to confusing of the source code of the package manager vs. the ebuild tree. Great to hear that you share this worry. Best, Sebastian
Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming changes to hosting of Git repos on git.gentoo.org (NOT overlays.git.gentoo.org)
On Friday 21 January 2011 22:35:38 Robin H. Johnson wrote:
Hi everybody,
Within the next week or two, the Infrastructure team hopes to have the
Git repos hosted on the main VCS server migrated into Gitolite [4] for
ease of management [1]. A more exact timeline will be published within
the next few days.
We would like to consider re-arranging the namespace of repositories at
the same time. Suggestions are welcome (to the -dev list), the only idea
we have so far is a set of top-level directories:
proj/${PROJNAME}/${REPONAME}.git
private/${PROJNAME}/${REPONAME}.git
gentoo-portage.git [2]
gentoo-portage-historical.git [2]
The entirety of the proj/ namespace will be mirrored to
sources.gentoo.org (and anon.gentoo.org). This replaces the selective
mishmash of choosing repositories that are mirrored.
When the change goes live, if you have a checkout from any of the
following repositories, you will need to change your remote as follows:
OLD:
git+ssh://${USERNAME}@git.gentoo.org/var/gitroot/${REPO}.git
NEW:
git+ssh://g...@git.gentoo.org/${PATH}/${REPO}.git
The easy way to do it:
# git remote set-url ${REMOTENAME} ${NEWURL}
REMOTENAME is usually 'origin', but advanced git users may have another
name.
It is applicable for the following repositories:
/var/gitroot/devmanual.git [3]
/var/gitroot/gentoo-viewvc-templates.git
/var/gitroot/gstats.git
/var/gitroot/packages.git
(plus 3 private repositories that will be listed on gentoo-core)
[1] Yes, this is one of the checkbox items on the way to hosting the
main repositories in Git.
[2] This is an idea where I'd like to place the main tree, and the
additional graftable tree with the full history. I'm not entirely
happy with this location, and WELCOME suggestions to improve it.
[3] This is the old location, prior to the repository move to
git.overlays.gentoo.org.
[4] Thanks to idl0r for working on some modifications we needed.
Assuming we're going to move the git.overlays.gentoo.org repos there as well
in the near future, this is the structure i am proposing:
source
- portage-main.git
- portage-history.git
infra (or sysadmin)
- (repo1).git
- (repo2).git
- ...
overlay
- project (instead of proj)
- sunrise.git
- kde.git
- ...
- personal (merge dev/ user/)
- aballier.git
- alexxy.git
- ...
website
- blogs.git
- planet.git
- forums.git
- gstats.git
- packages.git
- www.git (the gentoo cvs repo)
- ...
project (includes SOC projects, forks, gentoo projects etc)
- devmanual.git
- portage.git
- ...
--
Theo Chatzimichos (tampakrap)
Gentoo KDE/Qt, Planet, Overlays
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming changes to hosting of Git repos on git.gentoo.org (NOT overlays.git.gentoo.org)
On 04:38 Sat 22 Jan , Theo Chatzimichos wrote: Assuming we're going to move the git.overlays.gentoo.org repos there as well in the near future, this is the structure i am proposing: source - portage-main.git - portage-history.git infra (or sysadmin) - (repo1).git - (repo2).git - ... overlay - project (instead of proj) - sunrise.git - kde.git - ... - personal (merge dev/ user/) - aballier.git - alexxy.git - ... website - blogs.git - planet.git - forums.git - gstats.git - packages.git - www.git (the gentoo cvs repo) - ... project (includes SOC projects, forks, gentoo projects etc) - devmanual.git - portage.git - ... I don't see any particular reason to distinguish between the main tree and overlays in this structure. Just do something common for both, like tree/ or ebuilds/ or packages/. In the same vein, there's no good reason I can think of to discriminate between overlays that are project vs personal, since either can be supported or unsupported. -- Thanks, Donnie Donnie Berkholz Sr. Developer, Gentoo Linux Blog: http://dberkholz.com pgpuPMTE5EJDE.pgp Description: PGP signature
