Re: RFC: new location for openLilyLib repository

[Urs Liska]

Am 13.11.2015 um 10:57 schrieb Davide Liessi:
> 2015-11-13 6:02 GMT+01:00 Henning Hraban Ramm :
>> Why not combine the options? Use GitHub as long as it makes sense, but 
>> always keep a mirror on OLL server.
> That's my opinion, too: option a), plus mirroring the repositories at
> git.openlilylib.org.
>
>

It seems discussion settles towards this, so we'll go that route. With
regard to mirroring I think I'll do the following (please tell me if
someone has a better solution).

Create a Git repository on git.openlilylib.org's server (that is, a
local repository on the filesystem, not in the server's Gitlab
installation and have the Github repository as 'origin'.

Add a web hook on the Gitlab repo that triggers a script on the
openlilylib.org server. This script will fetch the updates from Github
and can optionally perform further tasks, e.g. build openLilyLib
documentation and deploy it.

As I don't want to require an http server kept running for this task I
would try to implement it in a way that the web server (Nginx) calls the
script when the Github web hook calls a certain URL. I don't know how to
do that yet but I assume it'll work similarly to calling up PHP stuff
through fastCGI.

###

One other thing to be discussed is the actual naming. As a prerequisite
I have significantly cleaned up the namespace below
https://github.com/openlilylib so that there are only three repositories
left. However, it's not clear how I should proceed now.

Currently we have the "openlilylib" repository which actually contains
two different things:

  * the original collection of "snippets" as started by Janek. These are
loosely organized and inconsistently documented LilyPond files
scattered in a number of directories.
  * A new, integrated approach for a library infrastructure, to be found
in the /ly directory in the repository. This contains a small number
of proof-of-concept (but also working) libraries. The new library
files are even less documented (only through source comments at the
maintainer's discretion) as designing a proper documentation system
is one of the most urgent issues that block any further development.

What we want to achieve is:

  * One repository with the core functionality of the new library
infrastructure (this contains the "API" against which libraries (or
user code) can work that Jan-Peter mentioned)
  * A number of library repositories.
The libraries that exist inside /ly, for example /ly/gridly or
/ly/scholarly, will be moved to repositories at this level. However,
I'm not sure if we should create an additional organization (e.g.
oll-libraries) for that to avoid cluttering the namespace and
website dashboard with potentially numerous libraries and other,
independent project repos.
BTW: This disentangling implies that *anyone* can create a new
library for use with openLilyLib and host it *anywhere*. This will
be so much better than the current approach of having the libraries
maintained *inside* one single repository.
  * The current repository, maybe renamed.

This set-up will have the big advantage that we can keep the existing
repository so no user code will break. Whenever something is moved to
the new structure we can make the current functions issue a deprecation
warning, telling the user where the new functionality should be taken
from (I have already done this several times and provided some helper
functions).
An implication and additional advantage is that we can keep the existing
repository as a collection of loosely related code (as Janek intended: a
git-managed and lily-version-agnostic LSR)

I suggest (and if noone objects will do it)

  * renaming the "openlilylib" repository to "snippets"
-> https://github.com/openlilylib/snippets
NOTE: This may require users to adapt their repository set-ups and
LilyPond include path settings
  * creating a new repository
https://github.com/openlilylib/oll-core
where the stuff from /ly/_internal will be moved (reviewing a number
of things along the way)


Regaring the location of the individual libraries, what would you
consider best:

  * adding all beside oll-core
(keeping the option that anyone creates libraries in their own place)
  * creating a new openlilylib sibling organization for that purpose
  * Just have library maintainers maintain their repos in their own
namespace
(providing a central listing of available libraries in some place,
of course)


Best
Urs



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: RFC: new location for openLilyLib repository

[Simon Albrecht]

Hello Urs,

I think this makes a very sound and nice impression. Go ahead!

Thanks, Simon

On 13.11.2015 11:58, Urs Liska wrote:



Am 13.11.2015 um 10:57 schrieb Davide Liessi:

2015-11-13 6:02 GMT+01:00 Henning Hraban Ramm:

Why not combine the options? Use GitHub as long as it makes sense, but always 
keep a mirror on OLL server.

That's my opinion, too: option a), plus mirroring the repositories at
git.openlilylib.org.




It seems discussion settles towards this, so we'll go that route. With 
regard to mirroring I think I'll do the following (please tell me if 
someone has a better solution).


Create a Git repository on git.openlilylib.org's server (that is, a 
local repository on the filesystem, not in the server's Gitlab 
installation and have the Github repository as 'origin'.


Add a web hook on the Gitlab repo that triggers a script on the 
openlilylib.org server. This script will fetch the updates from Github 
and can optionally perform further tasks, e.g. build openLilyLib 
documentation and deploy it.


As I don't want to require an http server kept running for this task I 
would try to implement it in a way that the web server (Nginx) calls 
the script when the Github web hook calls a certain URL. I don't know 
how to do that yet but I assume it'll work similarly to calling up PHP 
stuff through fastCGI.


###

One other thing to be discussed is the actual naming. As a 
prerequisite I have significantly cleaned up the namespace below 
https://github.com/openlilylib so that there are only three 
repositories left. However, it's not clear how I should proceed now.


Currently we have the "openlilylib" repository which actually contains 
two different things:


  * the original collection of "snippets" as started by Janek. These
are loosely organized and inconsistently documented LilyPond files
scattered in a number of directories.
  * A new, integrated approach for a library infrastructure, to be
found in the /ly directory in the repository. This contains a
small number of proof-of-concept (but also working) libraries. The
new library files are even less documented (only through source
comments at the maintainer's discretion) as designing a proper
documentation system is one of the most urgent issues that block
any further development.

What we want to achieve is:

  * One repository with the core functionality of the new library
infrastructure (this contains the "API" against which libraries
(or user code) can work that Jan-Peter mentioned)
  * A number of library repositories.
The libraries that exist inside /ly, for example /ly/gridly or
/ly/scholarly, will be moved to repositories at this level.
However, I'm not sure if we should create an additional
organization (e.g. oll-libraries) for that to avoid cluttering the
namespace and website dashboard with potentially numerous
libraries and other, independent project repos.
BTW: This disentangling implies that *anyone* can create a new
library for use with openLilyLib and host it *anywhere*. This will
be so much better than the current approach of having the
libraries maintained *inside* one single repository.
  * The current repository, maybe renamed.

This set-up will have the big advantage that we can keep the existing 
repository so no user code will break. Whenever something is moved to 
the new structure we can make the current functions issue a 
deprecation warning, telling the user where the new functionality 
should be taken from (I have already done this several times and 
provided some helper functions).
An implication and additional advantage is that we can keep the 
existing repository as a collection of loosely related code (as Janek 
intended: a git-managed and lily-version-agnostic LSR)


I suggest (and if noone objects will do it)

  * renaming the "openlilylib" repository to "snippets"
-> https://github.com/openlilylib/snippets
NOTE: This may require users to adapt their repository set-ups and
LilyPond include path settings
  * creating a new repository
https://github.com/openlilylib/oll-core
where the stuff from /ly/_internal will be moved (reviewing a
number of things along the way)


Regaring the location of the individual libraries, what would you 
consider best:


  * adding all beside oll-core
(keeping the option that anyone creates libraries in their own place)
  * creating a new openlilylib sibling organization for that purpose
  * Just have library maintainers maintain their repos in their own
namespace
(providing a central listing of available libraries in some place,
of course)


Best
Urs





___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org

Re: RFC: new location for openLilyLib repository

[Matteo Ceccarello]

I also vote for option a, and I agree with the comments of Sharon on 
option c.


Cheers,
Matteo

On 12/11/2015 23:22, ciconia wrote:

But there are also drawbacks to c) because it is hosted on my own (well,

hosted in a data center) server:

- I can guarantee availability to a lesser extent than a big service
provider
- I can't guarantee not to break things or lose everything due to
misconfiguration
- I can't guarantee that I will always have that kind of server or that
I'll even be around in the LilyPond community.
- I don't know if there's a smooth transfer path if the latter should
happen.

Therefore I'd like to ask around what you consider an appropriate
approach.

Exactly those drawbacks, and a some more:

- People would have to register on your site in order contribute, while at
least a substantial part of them are already on github.
- Github is also kind of the place to hang among younger developers, so you
risk losing that crowd if you wish to attract them to contribute.
- What about backup?

If your basic motive is reorganising the code, I think you don't really gain
anything from moving it away from github to your own server. Let's put it
like this, I'm sure you'd rather be coding than maintaining your gitlab
installation.

I say go with option a. You could use the existing github organisation and
just add repositories to it.

best
Sharon



--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/RFC-new-location-for-openLilyLib-repository-tp183476p183484.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: RFC: new location for openLilyLib repository

[Davide Liessi]

2015-11-13 6:02 GMT+01:00 Henning Hraban Ramm :
> Why not combine the options? Use GitHub as long as it makes sense, but always 
> keep a mirror on OLL server.

That's my opinion, too: option a), plus mirroring the repositories at
git.openlilylib.org.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: RFC: new location for openLilyLib repository

[Simon Albrecht]

On 13.11.2015 15:49, Urs Liska wrote:
(note: this will make it possible to create private/project/house 
repositories that take advantage of the openLilyLib infrastructure)


Will this also be possible for repositories hosted outside GitHub (e.g. 
with BitBucket?)


~Simon

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: RFC: new location for openLilyLib repository

[Federico Bruni]

Il giorno ven 13 nov 2015 alle 11:58, Urs Liska  ha 
scritto:

I suggest (and if noone objects will do it)
renaming the "openlilylib" repository to "snippets"
-> https://github.com/openlilylib/snippets
NOTE: This may require users to adapt their repository set-ups and 
LilyPond include path settings

creating a new repository
https://github.com/openlilylib/oll-core
where the stuff from /ly/_internal will be moved (reviewing a number 
of things along the way)


Regaring the location of the individual libraries, what would you 
consider best:

adding all beside oll-core
(keeping the option that anyone creates libraries in their own place)
creating a new openlilylib sibling organization for that purpose
Just have library maintainers maintain their repos in their own 
namespace
(providing a central listing of available libraries in some place, of 
course)


I would avoid confusion and keep a single organization.

The first option is the best IMO. I don't see the benefit of keeping 
the libraries in separate places. Libraries are the core content of 
openlilylib, not an additional feature (like e.g. an editor plugin). 
It's all plain text files, the size of the repository won't be big.





___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: RFC: new location for openLilyLib repository

[Urs Liska]

Am 13.11.2015 um 16:48 schrieb Simon Albrecht:
> On 13.11.2015 15:49, Urs Liska wrote:
>> (note: this will make it possible to create private/project/house
>> repositories that take advantage of the openLilyLib infrastructure)
>
> Will this also be possible for repositories hosted outside GitHub
> (e.g. with BitBucket?)
>
> ~Simon

Of course. As long as you are not intending to register a library with
openLilyLib the only "connection" that exists is that between your local
directory (doesn't even have to be a Git repository ...), the oll-core
library and LilyPond's include path.

And when you want to register a library with openLilyLib all we'll need
is an URL where we can fetch from, so BitBucket or any private (but
accessible) remote Git repository will work :-)

Urs

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: RFC: new location for openLilyLib repository

[Simon Albrecht]

On 13.11.2015 17:19, Federico Bruni wrote:
Il giorno ven 13 nov 2015 alle 11:58, Urs Liska  
ha scritto:

I suggest (and if noone objects will do it)
renaming the "openlilylib" repository to "snippets"
-> https://github.com/openlilylib/snippets
NOTE: This may require users to adapt their repository set-ups and 
LilyPond include path settings

creating a new repository
https://github.com/openlilylib/oll-core
where the stuff from /ly/_internal will be moved (reviewing a number 
of things along the way)


Regaring the location of the individual libraries, what would you 
consider best:

adding all beside oll-core
(keeping the option that anyone creates libraries in their own place)
creating a new openlilylib sibling organization for that purpose
Just have library maintainers maintain their repos in their own 
namespace
(providing a central listing of available libraries in some place, of 
course)


I would avoid confusion and keep a single organization.

The first option is the best IMO. I don't see the benefit of keeping 
the libraries in separate places. Libraries are the core content of 
openlilylib, not an additional feature (like e.g. an editor plugin).


The idea behind the new setup would be that the only ‘core’ content of 
openlilylib is some basic infrastructure, such as is contained in 
/ly/_internal. Every library can be used independently and arbitrarily, 
so they don’t make up any ‘core’.



It's all plain text files, the size of the repository won't be big.


Well, the memory size has never been the point, I think. It’s rather the 
difficulty of maintaining and managing a potentially great number of 
libraries, if e.g. everybody with push access to any of the libraries 
can push to all the other libraries too.


Yours, Simon

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: RFC: new location for openLilyLib repository

[Urs Liska]

Am 13.11.2015 um 18:51 schrieb Simon Albrecht:
> On 13.11.2015 17:19, Federico Bruni wrote:
>> Il giorno ven 13 nov 2015 alle 11:58, Urs Liska 
>> ha scritto:
>>> I suggest (and if noone objects will do it)
>>> renaming the "openlilylib" repository to "snippets"
>>> -> https://github.com/openlilylib/snippets
>>> NOTE: This may require users to adapt their repository set-ups and
>>> LilyPond include path settings
>>> creating a new repository
>>> https://github.com/openlilylib/oll-core
>>> where the stuff from /ly/_internal will be moved (reviewing a number
>>> of things along the way)
>>>
>>> Regaring the location of the individual libraries, what would you
>>> consider best:
>>> adding all beside oll-core
>>> (keeping the option that anyone creates libraries in their own place)
>>> creating a new openlilylib sibling organization for that purpose
>>> Just have library maintainers maintain their repos in their own
>>> namespace
>>> (providing a central listing of available libraries in some place,
>>> of course)
>>
>> I would avoid confusion and keep a single organization.
>>
>> The first option is the best IMO. I don't see the benefit of keeping
>> the libraries in separate places. Libraries are the core content of
>> openlilylib, not an additional feature (like e.g. an editor plugin).
>
> The idea behind the new setup would be that the only ‘core’ content of
> openlilylib is some basic infrastructure, such as is contained in
> /ly/_internal. Every library can be used independently and
> arbitrarily, so they don’t make up any ‘core’.
>
>> It's all plain text files, the size of the repository won't be big.
>
> Well, the memory size has never been the point, I think. It’s rather
> the difficulty of maintaining and managing a potentially great number
> of libraries, if e.g. everybody with push access to any of the
> libraries can push to all the other libraries too.

My main concern is that we'd end up with a large number of "library"
repositories and a few "other" ones mixed up. But Federico's comment
made me realize that we actually should see it from the other side: The
github/openlilylib organization should *only* contain the libraries (one
"core" and numerous libraries) while we should create an additional
organization for everything else. From the current state the oll-latex
and the lily-fonts repos should be moved to that new organization, and
when we create other "programming" or other non-library repositories
(e.g. a tool for building docs from LilyPond files) they should go there
too.

Urs


>
> Yours, Simon


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: RFC: new location for openLilyLib repository

[Urs Liska]

Am 13.11.2015 um 15:03 schrieb Paul Morris:
>> On Nov 13, 2015, at 5:58 AM, Urs Liska > > wrote:
>>
>> Regaring the location of the individual libraries, what would you
>> consider best:
>>
>>   * adding all beside oll-core
>> (keeping the option that anyone creates libraries in their own place)
>>   * creating a new openlilylib sibling organization for that purpose
>>   * Just have library maintainers maintain their repos in their own
>> namespace
>> (providing a central listing of available libraries in some
>> place, of course)
>>
> Does this depend somewhat on how the documentation will work? 

No :-)

> Seems like centralized documentation would be easier with centralized
> repos, but maybe it would work fine either way…

We'll have a central place where libraries are registered (this is part
of the plans for the "package manager"). Registered libraries are
basically pointers to remote repositories.

That means if you create a library against openLilyLib this is
originally private (note: this will make it possible to create
private/project/house repositories that take advantage of the
openLilyLib infrastructure).
When that library is registered with openLilyLib we'll have the URL
available to pull the repository in and create the documentation.
I hope we'll also manage to provide a hook so when that library is later
pushed to Github the documentation is automatically updated.

I think we'll then provide a script to (locally) generate documentation
for just the library and another one to create and deploy the full set
of docs.

Urs

>
> -Paul

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: RFC: new location for openLilyLib repository

[Urs Liska]

Am 13. November 2015 14:55:43 MEZ, schrieb Paul Morris :
>> On Nov 13, 2015, at 5:58 AM, Urs Liska  wrote:
>> renaming the "openlilylib" repository to "snippets"
>> -> https://github.com/openlilylib/snippets
>
>> NOTE: This may require users to adapt their repository set-ups and
>LilyPond include path settings
>What about this instead: clone or copy to a new /openlilylib/snippets
>repo, leaving the current /openlilylib/openlilylib in place for now. 
>Then users can change to the new one while the old one still works. 
>After a transition period, delete the old one.  That would provide a
>smoother transition for users.  

Sounds good. I'll do that later and try to make things clear in the READMEs.

Urs

>
>Just a suggestion.  The rest of the plan seems fine to me.
>
>-Paul

-- 
Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit K-9 Mail gesendet.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: RFC: new location for openLilyLib repository

[Paul Morris]

> On Nov 13, 2015, at 5:58 AM, Urs Liska  wrote:
> Regaring the location of the individual libraries, what would you consider 
> best:
> 
> adding all beside oll-core
> (keeping the option that anyone creates libraries in their own place)
> creating a new openlilylib sibling organization for that purpose
> Just have library maintainers maintain their repos in their own namespace
> (providing a central listing of available libraries in some place, of course)
Does this depend somewhat on how the documentation will work?  Seems like 
centralized documentation would be easier with centralized repos, but maybe it 
would work fine either way…

-Paul___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: RFC: new location for openLilyLib repository

[Paul Morris]

> On Nov 13, 2015, at 5:58 AM, Urs Liska  wrote:
> renaming the "openlilylib" repository to "snippets"
> -> https://github.com/openlilylib/snippets 
> 
> NOTE: This may require users to adapt their repository set-ups and LilyPond 
> include path settings
What about this instead: clone or copy to a new /openlilylib/snippets repo, 
leaving the current /openlilylib/openlilylib in place for now.  Then users can 
change to the new one while the old one still works.  After a transition 
period, delete the old one.  That would provide a smoother transition for 
users.  

Just a suggestion.  The rest of the plan seems fine to me.

-Paul___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: RFC: new location for openLilyLib repository

[ciconia]

> But there are also drawbacks to c) because it is hosted on my own (well,
hosted in a data center) server:
> 
> - I can guarantee availability to a lesser extent than a big service
> provider
> - I can't guarantee not to break things or lose everything due to
> misconfiguration
> - I can't guarantee that I will always have that kind of server or that
> I'll even be around in the LilyPond community.
> - I don't know if there's a smooth transfer path if the latter should
> happen.
>
> Therefore I'd like to ask around what you consider an appropriate
> approach.

Exactly those drawbacks, and a some more:

- People would have to register on your site in order contribute, while at
least a substantial part of them are already on github.
- Github is also kind of the place to hang among younger developers, so you
risk losing that crowd if you wish to attract them to contribute.
- What about backup?

If your basic motive is reorganising the code, I think you don't really gain
anything from moving it away from github to your own server. Let's put it
like this, I'm sure you'd rather be coding than maintaining your gitlab
installation.

I say go with option a. You could use the existing github organisation and
just add repositories to it.

best
Sharon



--
View this message in context: 
http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/RFC-new-location-for-openLilyLib-repository-tp183476p183484.html
Sent from the User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: RFC: new location for openLilyLib repository

[Henning Hraban Ramm]

Am 2015-11-13 um 04:22 schrieb ciconia :

> Exactly those drawbacks, and a some more:
> - People would have to register on your site in order contribute, while at
> least a substantial part of them are already on github.
> - Github is also kind of the place to hang among younger developers, so you
> risk losing that crowd if you wish to attract them to contribute.
> - What about backup?
> 
> If your basic motive is reorganising the code, I think you don't really gain
> anything from moving it away from github to your own server. Let's put it
> like this, I'm sure you'd rather be coding than maintaining your gitlab
> installation.
> 
> I say go with option a. You could use the existing github organisation and
> just add repositories to it.

Why not combine the options? Use GitHub as long as it makes sense, but always 
keep a mirror on OLL server.

Then you can use any automation you want on your own server but still use the 
better publicity of GitHub.

If it makes sense, I can also provide a mirror, since I run Gitlab on my server 
anyway, even if I’m not keen on more maintenance work.


Greetlings, Hraban
---
fiëé visuëlle
Henning Hraban Ramm
http://www.fiee.net
http://angerweit.tikon.ch/lieder/
https://www.cacert.org (I'm an assurer)





___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: RFC: new location for openLilyLib repository

[Federico Bruni]

Il giorno gio 12 nov 2015 alle 17:06, Urs Liska  ha 
scritto:

c)
We could move everything to https://git.openlilylib.org.

In a way I would prefer c) because:

- it "looks" more natural
- it would move away some stuff from Github
- it would make it more natural to have git hooks process stuff and
deploy the library and/or the documentation to other locations on
openlilylib.org

But there are also drawbacks to c) because it is hosted on my own 
(well,

hosted in a data center) server:

- I can guarantee availability to a lesser extent than a big service
provider
- I can't guarantee not to break things or lose everything due to
misconfiguration
- I can't guarantee that I will always have that kind of server or 
that

I'll even be around in the LilyPond community.
- I don't know if there's a smooth transfer path if the latter should
happen.

Therefore I'd like to ask around what you consider an appropriate 
approach.


It depends on you and your will to maintain the gitlab instance on your 
VPS.

I'm ok with working either on Github and on git.openlilylib.org
Except your maintenance effort, I see more pros than cons in c).

Just wait a few days, I have a new PR coming soon :)




___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

RFC: new location for openLilyLib repository

[Urs Liska]

Hi all,

I've for a while been thinking about re-building openLilyLib at a new
location. For several reasons:

1)
The conversion from the "original" heap of snippets (the snippets in the
various top-level directories) to a "new" structure (the "libraries"
inside the /ly directory of the repository) is proceeding significantly
slower than expected so the awkward situation that users have to
maintain both the root and one directory inside in LilyPond's include
path seems to be a somewhat semi-permanent state.

2)
If the "new" *library* infrastructure was in a new repository there is
no need to *completely* move the existing stuff and find appropriate
spots in the new libraries. Instead we could keep the somewhat unordered
collection of snippets as a more open "playground" and build the proper
library infrastructure separately.

3)
I realized that the current "layout" with the libraries living *inside*
openLilyLib is suboptimal for several reasons, and I want the libraries
to be maintained in individual repositories. So there will be the "core"
openLilyLib providing the infrastructure and common functionality and an
arbitrary number of libraries that can be maintained independently,
making responsitibility for maintainership clearer and allowing better
control of project membership.

I'm pretty clear with that and wouldn't ask for comments (although I'll
of course listen to any objections), but I'm not sure about the best
location for the new repositories.

a)
We could just add new repositories in the "openlilylib" organization on
Github.

b)
We could create a new organization or add the repos to the existing
"lilypond" organization

c)
We could move everything to https://git.openlilylib.org.

In a way I would prefer c) because:

- it "looks" more natural
- it would move away some stuff from Github
- it would make it more natural to have git hooks process stuff and
deploy the library and/or the documentation to other locations on
openlilylib.org

But there are also drawbacks to c) because it is hosted on my own (well,
hosted in a data center) server:

- I can guarantee availability to a lesser extent than a big service
provider
- I can't guarantee not to break things or lose everything due to
misconfiguration
- I can't guarantee that I will always have that kind of server or that
I'll even be around in the LilyPond community.
- I don't know if there's a smooth transfer path if the latter should
happen.

Therefore I'd like to ask around what you consider an appropriate approach.

TIA
Best
Urs

-- 
Urs Liska
www.openlilylib.org

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: RFC: new location for openLilyLib repository

[Jan-Peter Voigt]

Hi Urs,

this is a great idea! This would mean development of an API for 
plugins/modules - and anybody can develop against that API ...

I am at work right now, so now for short:

The solution c would be nice, but I would say, we should stay on github 
... we have other work to do and life offline ;)


Cheers,
Jan-Peter

Am 12.11.2015 um 17:06 schrieb Urs Liska:

Hi all,

I've for a while been thinking about re-building openLilyLib at a new
location. For several reasons:

1)
The conversion from the "original" heap of snippets (the snippets in the
various top-level directories) to a "new" structure (the "libraries"
inside the /ly directory of the repository) is proceeding significantly
slower than expected so the awkward situation that users have to
maintain both the root and one directory inside in LilyPond's include
path seems to be a somewhat semi-permanent state.

2)
If the "new" *library* infrastructure was in a new repository there is
no need to *completely* move the existing stuff and find appropriate
spots in the new libraries. Instead we could keep the somewhat unordered
collection of snippets as a more open "playground" and build the proper
library infrastructure separately.

3)
I realized that the current "layout" with the libraries living *inside*
openLilyLib is suboptimal for several reasons, and I want the libraries
to be maintained in individual repositories. So there will be the "core"
openLilyLib providing the infrastructure and common functionality and an
arbitrary number of libraries that can be maintained independently,
making responsitibility for maintainership clearer and allowing better
control of project membership.

I'm pretty clear with that and wouldn't ask for comments (although I'll
of course listen to any objections), but I'm not sure about the best
location for the new repositories.

a)
We could just add new repositories in the "openlilylib" organization on
Github.

b)
We could create a new organization or add the repos to the existing
"lilypond" organization

c)
We could move everything to https://git.openlilylib.org.

In a way I would prefer c) because:

- it "looks" more natural
- it would move away some stuff from Github
- it would make it more natural to have git hooks process stuff and
deploy the library and/or the documentation to other locations on
openlilylib.org

But there are also drawbacks to c) because it is hosted on my own (well,
hosted in a data center) server:

- I can guarantee availability to a lesser extent than a big service
provider
- I can't guarantee not to break things or lose everything due to
misconfiguration
- I can't guarantee that I will always have that kind of server or that
I'll even be around in the LilyPond community.
- I don't know if there's a smooth transfer path if the latter should
happen.

Therefore I'd like to ask around what you consider an appropriate approach.

TIA
Best
Urs




___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: RFC: new location for openLilyLib repository

[Urs Liska]

Am 12. November 2015 17:56:51 MEZ, schrieb Jan-Peter Voigt :
>Hi Urs,
>
>this is a great idea! This would mean development of an API for 
>plugins/modules - and anybody can develop against that API ...

Well, actually this is more or less in place already now. Re-building OLL would 
give the opportunity to iron out a few glitches. I intentionally refrained from 
pushing more than the handful of libraries to the new structure. 

>I am at work right now, so now for short:
>
>The solution c would be nice, but I would say, we should stay on github
>
>... we have other work to do and life offline ;)

That doesn't really answer my question. *Moving* to the new location would mean 
zero work as I have Gitlab running and in use already. The issue us the 
maintenance. 

Urs

>
>Cheers,
>Jan-Peter
>
>Am 12.11.2015 um 17:06 schrieb Urs Liska:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've for a while been thinking about re-building openLilyLib at a new
>> location. For several reasons:
>>
>> 1)
>> The conversion from the "original" heap of snippets (the snippets in
>the
>> various top-level directories) to a "new" structure (the "libraries"
>> inside the /ly directory of the repository) is proceeding
>significantly
>> slower than expected so the awkward situation that users have to
>> maintain both the root and one directory inside in LilyPond's include
>> path seems to be a somewhat semi-permanent state.
>>
>> 2)
>> If the "new" *library* infrastructure was in a new repository there
>is
>> no need to *completely* move the existing stuff and find appropriate
>> spots in the new libraries. Instead we could keep the somewhat
>unordered
>> collection of snippets as a more open "playground" and build the
>proper
>> library infrastructure separately.
>>
>> 3)
>> I realized that the current "layout" with the libraries living
>*inside*
>> openLilyLib is suboptimal for several reasons, and I want the
>libraries
>> to be maintained in individual repositories. So there will be the
>"core"
>> openLilyLib providing the infrastructure and common functionality and
>an
>> arbitrary number of libraries that can be maintained independently,
>> making responsitibility for maintainership clearer and allowing
>better
>> control of project membership.
>>
>> I'm pretty clear with that and wouldn't ask for comments (although
>I'll
>> of course listen to any objections), but I'm not sure about the best
>> location for the new repositories.
>>
>> a)
>> We could just add new repositories in the "openlilylib" organization
>on
>> Github.
>>
>> b)
>> We could create a new organization or add the repos to the existing
>> "lilypond" organization
>>
>> c)
>> We could move everything to https://git.openlilylib.org.
>>
>> In a way I would prefer c) because:
>>
>> - it "looks" more natural
>> - it would move away some stuff from Github
>> - it would make it more natural to have git hooks process stuff and
>> deploy the library and/or the documentation to other locations on
>> openlilylib.org
>>
>> But there are also drawbacks to c) because it is hosted on my own
>(well,
>> hosted in a data center) server:
>>
>> - I can guarantee availability to a lesser extent than a big service
>> provider
>> - I can't guarantee not to break things or lose everything due to
>> misconfiguration
>> - I can't guarantee that I will always have that kind of server or
>that
>> I'll even be around in the LilyPond community.
>> - I don't know if there's a smooth transfer path if the latter should
>> happen.
>>
>> Therefore I'd like to ask around what you consider an appropriate
>approach.
>>
>> TIA
>> Best
>> Urs
>>
>
>
>___
>lilypond-user mailing list
>lilypond-user@gnu.org
>https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

-- 
Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit K-9 Mail gesendet.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: RFC: new location for openLilyLib repository

[Urs Liska]

Am 12. November 2015 18:40:37 MEZ, schrieb Federico Bruni :
>Il giorno gio 12 nov 2015 alle 17:06, Urs Liska  ha
>
>scritto:
>> c)
>> We could move everything to https://git.openlilylib.org.
>> 
>> In a way I would prefer c) because:
>> 
>> - it "looks" more natural
>> - it would move away some stuff from Github
>> - it would make it more natural to have git hooks process stuff and
>> deploy the library and/or the documentation to other locations on
>> openlilylib.org
>> 
>> But there are also drawbacks to c) because it is hosted on my own 
>> (well,
>> hosted in a data center) server:
>> 
>> - I can guarantee availability to a lesser extent than a big service
>> provider
>> - I can't guarantee not to break things or lose everything due to
>> misconfiguration
>> - I can't guarantee that I will always have that kind of server or 
>> that
>> I'll even be around in the LilyPond community.
>> - I don't know if there's a smooth transfer path if the latter should
>> happen.
>> 
>> Therefore I'd like to ask around what you consider an appropriate 
>> approach.
>
>It depends on you and your will to maintain the gitlab instance on your
>
>VPS.

I do have the will and intend to do that for my own purposes anyway. It's just 
somethong different if you feel responsible for a community "service".

>I'm ok with working either on Github and on git.openlilylib.org
>Except your maintenance effort, I see more pros than cons in c).
>
>Just wait a few days, I have a new PR coming soon :)

No rush :-)
Looking forward.

Urs
-- 
Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Mobiltelefon mit K-9 Mail gesendet.

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: RFC: new location for openLilyLib repository

[Jan-Peter Voigt]

Am 12.11.2015 um 19:38 schrieb Urs Liska:


Am 12. November 2015 17:56:51 MEZ, schrieb Jan-Peter Voigt :

Hi Urs,

this is a great idea! This would mean development of an API for
plugins/modules - and anybody can develop against that API ...

Well, actually this is more or less in place already now. Re-building OLL would 
give the opportunity to iron out a few glitches. I intentionally refrained from 
pushing more than the handful of libraries to the new structure.
I know, there is already a structure, that means "place a folder with a 
named include-file in there - then include it.
But you and Matteo wrote about packaging things. So there is space for a 
\usepackage thing ;)

I am at work right now, so now for short:

The solution c would be nice, but I would say, we should stay on github

... we have other work to do and life offline ;)

That doesn't really answer my question. *Moving* to the new location would mean 
zero work as I have Gitlab running and in use already. The issue us the 
maintenance.
It is the maintenance to have it runningas a service, as you just 
answered Frederico.
If you can say, that is OK, I would appreciate a solution with a 
git.openlilylib.org address!


Best, Jan-Peter


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user