Re: [DISCUSS/NOTICE] Renaming default git repo branches to "main"
I have pushed updates for the site and its related release scripts etc now.
On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 17:53, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>
> I have still to update the site itself, but I did take care of
> removing its repository master branch entirely with Infra's assistance
> (i.e. it has no 'main' branch replacement, only asf-site is left now)
> .
>
> On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 14:00, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
> >
> > I believe I have now updated the Jenkins, GitHub Actions, and Travis
> > CI job configs as needed to reflect the branch changes for the various
> > repos. I updated various references in READMEs and instructions etc to
> > cover the changes also.
> >
> > The website still needs work done to update things, I'll hopefully get
> > that later today.
> >
> > Robbie
> >
> > On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 12:59, Robbie Gemmell
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 09:29, Robbie Gemmell
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The remaining repositories have now had their default branches renamed
> > > > from master to main, following the earlier test change.
> > > >
> > > > If you have an existing clone of a repo, you either need to re-clone
> > > > it, or manually update your local repo to ensure it reflects the
> > > > branch name change.
> > > >
> > > > For the latter these are GitHub's suggested steps:
> > > > git branch -m master main
> > > > git fetch origin
> > > > git branch -u origin/main main
> > > >
> > > > (Where 'origin' is the git remote name given to the repo, update this
> > > > as appropriate for your naming choice if different)
> > > >
> > >
> > > I notice when renaming my fork branches that GitHub have updated now
> > > updated their suggested steps from previously to incorporate a 4th
> > > step, aimed toward achieving a similar update as the additional steps
> > > I had added myself below.
> > >
> > > They now also suggest running this as well in addition after the above
> > > steps:
> > > git remote set-head origin -a
> > >
> > > From a search I believe this contacts the remote repo ('origin'),
> > > determines its updated default branch, and updates the remotes head
> > > ref to match, rather than manually setting it and pruning all
> > > non-existing remote refs as I suggested below. Much the same except
> > > the pruning of any other stale refs.
> > >
> > > > Note that you will also have to do the rename in your own existing
> > > > GitHub forks if you want them to align. GitHub notifies you of the
> > > > change in its UI when you load your fork repo page, and directs you to
> > > > the relevant space in settings (essentially go to
> > > > https://github.com///settings/branches and then
> > > > click the pencil to rename, type in main).
> > > >
> > > > As a final point, for those who update an existing local repo using
> > > > the steps above, you may spot you still have a 'remote ref' pointing
> > > > to origin/master (e.g if you run git branch -avv you would see an
> > > > entry like: remotes/origin/HEAD -> origin/master). This is a local
> > > > value that only gets set while cloning, based on the default branch of
> > > > the remote repo at the time. Its mostly not important but you can
> > > > update it yourself anyway. I elected to do this, by first explicitly
> > > > setting the ref to origin/main and then pruning any refs for 'origin'
> > > > (or again, whatever you named your repo remote) that dont actually
> > > > exist on the remote repo:
> > > > git remote set-head origin main
> > > > git remote prune --dry-run origin
> > > >
> > > > (Note the latter is a --dry-run, repeat the command again without that
> > > > flag if you are happy with what it said it will do, i.e it will
> > > > indicate it would prune origin/master, but will also prune any other
> > > > 'origin' refs you have for branches that no longer exist in the remote
> > > > repo)
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 at 17:07, Robbie Gemmell
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I was going to begin this tomorrow as noted below, however since I
> > > > > sent this proposal I have now been both on the receiving end of a
> > > > > GitHub-driven rename and done some of them for myself...that is, doing
> > > > > the rename with their tooling as described at
> > > > > https://github.com/github/renaming.
> > > > >
> > > > > It is a nicer process than I outlined below, with some benefits we
> > > > > wouldnt get doing it the other way. As we can actually push to the ASF
> > > > > GitHub 'mirrors' if jumping through appropriate hoops first, I decided
> > > > > to enquire with Infra whether it might actually be possible to use the
> > > > > GitHub driven approach. It isnt something they have done before, but
> > > > > said they'll take a look at it, and could perhaps use us to try it
> > > > > out. I have now raised
> > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21589 for this either way,
> > > > > and I'll keep you updated with what is happening.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 at 12:21, Robbie Gemmell
> > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS/NOTICE] Renaming default git repo branches to "main"
I raised https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21667 to ask for Infra to remove the qpid-proton repository 'master' branch protection so that I could delete its accidentally-recreated master, which is now done. Can any committers that have not yet done so please ensure you update your local repositories to use 'main' going forward, to help try and avoid further occurrences of this. As reminder, these are GitHub's recommended steps to update an existing local repo (you can of course just do a fresh clone instead and begin afresh): git branch -m master main git fetch origin git branch -u origin/main main git remote set-head origin -a Or alternatively, I had been doing this instead of their last step before they added it, which achieves much the same but also prunes all stale refs for the remote: git remote set-head origin main git remote prune --dry-run origin (repeating without --dry-run if happy with the refs it says it will prune) Robbie On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 12:47, Robbie Gemmell wrote: > > No worries, very easy thing to happen without exact coordination. > > On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 12:13, Oleksandr Rudyy wrote: > > > > Hi Robbie, > > Thanks for branch removal. > > My apologies, I have not checked the state of the repo before the commit. > > > > Kind Regards, > > Alex > > > > On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 10:31, Robbie Gemmell > > wrote: > > > > > > Infra removed the protection from master for me and I have now removed > > > the branch again. > > > > > > (The same protection remains for all the other repositories for now, > > > it will be removed if actually needed). > > > > > > On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 10:21, Robbie Gemmell > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > I see that qpid-broker-j was being worked on over the precise period > > > > the renames were being done, and so has unfortunately already had the > > > > master branch re-created by a push. > > > > > > > > I've brought the main up to date with the change, but I cant delete > > > > the old master branch as its protected from being rewound. I will > > > > enquire with infra. > > > > > > > > On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 09:29, Robbie Gemmell > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > The remaining repositories have now had their default branches renamed > > > > > from master to main, following the earlier test change. > > > > > > > > > > If you have an existing clone of a repo, you either need to re-clone > > > > > it, or manually update your local repo to ensure it reflects the > > > > > branch name change. > > > > > > > > > > For the latter these are GitHub's suggested steps: > > > > > git branch -m master main > > > > > git fetch origin > > > > > git branch -u origin/main main > > > > > > > > > > (Where 'origin' is the git remote name given to the repo, update this > > > > > as appropriate for your naming choice if different) > > > > > > > > > > Note that you will also have to do the rename in your own existing > > > > > GitHub forks if you want them to align. GitHub notifies you of the > > > > > change in its UI when you load your fork repo page, and directs you to > > > > > the relevant space in settings (essentially go to > > > > > https://github.com///settings/branches and then > > > > > click the pencil to rename, type in main). > > > > > > > > > > As a final point, for those who update an existing local repo using > > > > > the steps above, you may spot you still have a 'remote ref' pointing > > > > > to origin/master (e.g if you run git branch -avv you would see an > > > > > entry like: remotes/origin/HEAD -> origin/master). This is a local > > > > > value that only gets set while cloning, based on the default branch of > > > > > the remote repo at the time. Its mostly not important but you can > > > > > update it yourself anyway. I elected to do this, by first explicitly > > > > > setting the ref to origin/main and then pruning any refs for 'origin' > > > > > (or again, whatever you named your repo remote) that dont actually > > > > > exist on the remote repo: > > > > > git remote set-head origin main > > > > > git remote prune --dry-run origin > > > > > > > > > > (Note the latter is a --dry-run, repeat the command again without that > > > > > flag if you are happy with what it said it will do, i.e it will > > > > > indicate it would prune origin/master, but will also prune any other > > > > > 'origin' refs you have for branches that no longer exist in the remote > > > > > repo) > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 at 17:07, Robbie Gemmell > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > I was going to begin this tomorrow as noted below, however since I > > > > > > sent this proposal I have now been both on the receiving end of a > > > > > > GitHub-driven rename and done some of them for myself...that is, > > > > > > doing > > > > > > the rename with their tooling as described at > > > > > > https://github.com/github/renaming. > > > > > > > > > > > > It is a nicer process than I outlined below, with some benefits we > > > > > > wouldnt get doing it
Re: [DISCUSS/NOTICE] Renaming default git repo branches to "main"
I have still to update the site itself, but I did take care of
removing its repository master branch entirely with Infra's assistance
(i.e. it has no 'main' branch replacement, only asf-site is left now)
.
On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 14:00, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>
> I believe I have now updated the Jenkins, GitHub Actions, and Travis
> CI job configs as needed to reflect the branch changes for the various
> repos. I updated various references in READMEs and instructions etc to
> cover the changes also.
>
> The website still needs work done to update things, I'll hopefully get
> that later today.
>
> Robbie
>
> On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 12:59, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 09:29, Robbie Gemmell
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > The remaining repositories have now had their default branches renamed
> > > from master to main, following the earlier test change.
> > >
> > > If you have an existing clone of a repo, you either need to re-clone
> > > it, or manually update your local repo to ensure it reflects the
> > > branch name change.
> > >
> > > For the latter these are GitHub's suggested steps:
> > > git branch -m master main
> > > git fetch origin
> > > git branch -u origin/main main
> > >
> > > (Where 'origin' is the git remote name given to the repo, update this
> > > as appropriate for your naming choice if different)
> > >
> >
> > I notice when renaming my fork branches that GitHub have updated now
> > updated their suggested steps from previously to incorporate a 4th
> > step, aimed toward achieving a similar update as the additional steps
> > I had added myself below.
> >
> > They now also suggest running this as well in addition after the above
> > steps:
> > git remote set-head origin -a
> >
> > From a search I believe this contacts the remote repo ('origin'),
> > determines its updated default branch, and updates the remotes head
> > ref to match, rather than manually setting it and pruning all
> > non-existing remote refs as I suggested below. Much the same except
> > the pruning of any other stale refs.
> >
> > > Note that you will also have to do the rename in your own existing
> > > GitHub forks if you want them to align. GitHub notifies you of the
> > > change in its UI when you load your fork repo page, and directs you to
> > > the relevant space in settings (essentially go to
> > > https://github.com///settings/branches and then
> > > click the pencil to rename, type in main).
> > >
> > > As a final point, for those who update an existing local repo using
> > > the steps above, you may spot you still have a 'remote ref' pointing
> > > to origin/master (e.g if you run git branch -avv you would see an
> > > entry like: remotes/origin/HEAD -> origin/master). This is a local
> > > value that only gets set while cloning, based on the default branch of
> > > the remote repo at the time. Its mostly not important but you can
> > > update it yourself anyway. I elected to do this, by first explicitly
> > > setting the ref to origin/main and then pruning any refs for 'origin'
> > > (or again, whatever you named your repo remote) that dont actually
> > > exist on the remote repo:
> > > git remote set-head origin main
> > > git remote prune --dry-run origin
> > >
> > > (Note the latter is a --dry-run, repeat the command again without that
> > > flag if you are happy with what it said it will do, i.e it will
> > > indicate it would prune origin/master, but will also prune any other
> > > 'origin' refs you have for branches that no longer exist in the remote
> > > repo)
> > >
> > > On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 at 17:07, Robbie Gemmell
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I was going to begin this tomorrow as noted below, however since I
> > > > sent this proposal I have now been both on the receiving end of a
> > > > GitHub-driven rename and done some of them for myself...that is, doing
> > > > the rename with their tooling as described at
> > > > https://github.com/github/renaming.
> > > >
> > > > It is a nicer process than I outlined below, with some benefits we
> > > > wouldnt get doing it the other way. As we can actually push to the ASF
> > > > GitHub 'mirrors' if jumping through appropriate hoops first, I decided
> > > > to enquire with Infra whether it might actually be possible to use the
> > > > GitHub driven approach. It isnt something they have done before, but
> > > > said they'll take a look at it, and could perhaps use us to try it
> > > > out. I have now raised
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21589 for this either way,
> > > > and I'll keep you updated with what is happening.
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 at 12:21, Robbie Gemmell
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi folks,
> > > > >
> > > > > I would like to propose renaming our git repository default branches
> > > > > from "master" to "main" in keeping with general efforts to remove
> > > > > offensive language, and also aligning with it being the default naming
> > > > > approach on new repositories in various
Re: [DISCUSS/NOTICE] Renaming default git repo branches to "main"
On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 9:06 AM Robbie Gemmell
wrote:
> I believe I have now updated the Jenkins, GitHub Actions, and Travis
> CI job configs as needed to reflect the branch changes for the various
> repos. I updated various references in READMEs and instructions etc to
> cover the changes also.
>
Thank you very much Robbie.
>
> The website still needs work done to update things, I'll hopefully get
> that later today.
>
> Robbie
>
> On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 12:59, Robbie Gemmell
> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 09:29, Robbie Gemmell
> wrote:
> > >
> > > The remaining repositories have now had their default branches renamed
> > > from master to main, following the earlier test change.
> > >
> > > If you have an existing clone of a repo, you either need to re-clone
> > > it, or manually update your local repo to ensure it reflects the
> > > branch name change.
> > >
> > > For the latter these are GitHub's suggested steps:
> > > git branch -m master main
> > > git fetch origin
> > > git branch -u origin/main main
> > >
> > > (Where 'origin' is the git remote name given to the repo, update this
> > > as appropriate for your naming choice if different)
> > >
> >
> > I notice when renaming my fork branches that GitHub have updated now
> > updated their suggested steps from previously to incorporate a 4th
> > step, aimed toward achieving a similar update as the additional steps
> > I had added myself below.
> >
> > They now also suggest running this as well in addition after the above
> steps:
> > git remote set-head origin -a
> >
> > From a search I believe this contacts the remote repo ('origin'),
> > determines its updated default branch, and updates the remotes head
> > ref to match, rather than manually setting it and pruning all
> > non-existing remote refs as I suggested below. Much the same except
> > the pruning of any other stale refs.
> >
> > > Note that you will also have to do the rename in your own existing
> > > GitHub forks if you want them to align. GitHub notifies you of the
> > > change in its UI when you load your fork repo page, and directs you to
> > > the relevant space in settings (essentially go to
> > > https://github.com///settings/branches and then
> > > click the pencil to rename, type in main).
> > >
> > > As a final point, for those who update an existing local repo using
> > > the steps above, you may spot you still have a 'remote ref' pointing
> > > to origin/master (e.g if you run git branch -avv you would see an
> > > entry like: remotes/origin/HEAD -> origin/master). This is a local
> > > value that only gets set while cloning, based on the default branch of
> > > the remote repo at the time. Its mostly not important but you can
> > > update it yourself anyway. I elected to do this, by first explicitly
> > > setting the ref to origin/main and then pruning any refs for 'origin'
> > > (or again, whatever you named your repo remote) that dont actually
> > > exist on the remote repo:
> > > git remote set-head origin main
> > > git remote prune --dry-run origin
> > >
> > > (Note the latter is a --dry-run, repeat the command again without that
> > > flag if you are happy with what it said it will do, i.e it will
> > > indicate it would prune origin/master, but will also prune any other
> > > 'origin' refs you have for branches that no longer exist in the remote
> > > repo)
> > >
> > > On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 at 17:07, Robbie Gemmell
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I was going to begin this tomorrow as noted below, however since I
> > > > sent this proposal I have now been both on the receiving end of a
> > > > GitHub-driven rename and done some of them for myself...that is,
> doing
> > > > the rename with their tooling as described at
> > > > https://github.com/github/renaming.
> > > >
> > > > It is a nicer process than I outlined below, with some benefits we
> > > > wouldnt get doing it the other way. As we can actually push to the
> ASF
> > > > GitHub 'mirrors' if jumping through appropriate hoops first, I
> decided
> > > > to enquire with Infra whether it might actually be possible to use
> the
> > > > GitHub driven approach. It isnt something they have done before, but
> > > > said they'll take a look at it, and could perhaps use us to try it
> > > > out. I have now raised
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21589 for this either
> way,
> > > > and I'll keep you updated with what is happening.
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 at 12:21, Robbie Gemmell <
> robbie.gemm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi folks,
> > > > >
> > > > > I would like to propose renaming our git repository default
> branches
> > > > > from "master" to "main" in keeping with general efforts to remove
> > > > > offensive language, and also aligning with it being the default
> naming
> > > > > approach on new repositories in various places for some time now.
> > > > >
> > > > > Having looked into doing this my understanding is that we simply
> > > > > create the new branches
Re: [DISCUSS/NOTICE] Renaming default git repo branches to "main"
I believe I have now updated the Jenkins, GitHub Actions, and Travis
CI job configs as needed to reflect the branch changes for the various
repos. I updated various references in READMEs and instructions etc to
cover the changes also.
The website still needs work done to update things, I'll hopefully get
that later today.
Robbie
On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 12:59, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>
> On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 09:29, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
> >
> > The remaining repositories have now had their default branches renamed
> > from master to main, following the earlier test change.
> >
> > If you have an existing clone of a repo, you either need to re-clone
> > it, or manually update your local repo to ensure it reflects the
> > branch name change.
> >
> > For the latter these are GitHub's suggested steps:
> > git branch -m master main
> > git fetch origin
> > git branch -u origin/main main
> >
> > (Where 'origin' is the git remote name given to the repo, update this
> > as appropriate for your naming choice if different)
> >
>
> I notice when renaming my fork branches that GitHub have updated now
> updated their suggested steps from previously to incorporate a 4th
> step, aimed toward achieving a similar update as the additional steps
> I had added myself below.
>
> They now also suggest running this as well in addition after the above steps:
> git remote set-head origin -a
>
> From a search I believe this contacts the remote repo ('origin'),
> determines its updated default branch, and updates the remotes head
> ref to match, rather than manually setting it and pruning all
> non-existing remote refs as I suggested below. Much the same except
> the pruning of any other stale refs.
>
> > Note that you will also have to do the rename in your own existing
> > GitHub forks if you want them to align. GitHub notifies you of the
> > change in its UI when you load your fork repo page, and directs you to
> > the relevant space in settings (essentially go to
> > https://github.com///settings/branches and then
> > click the pencil to rename, type in main).
> >
> > As a final point, for those who update an existing local repo using
> > the steps above, you may spot you still have a 'remote ref' pointing
> > to origin/master (e.g if you run git branch -avv you would see an
> > entry like: remotes/origin/HEAD -> origin/master). This is a local
> > value that only gets set while cloning, based on the default branch of
> > the remote repo at the time. Its mostly not important but you can
> > update it yourself anyway. I elected to do this, by first explicitly
> > setting the ref to origin/main and then pruning any refs for 'origin'
> > (or again, whatever you named your repo remote) that dont actually
> > exist on the remote repo:
> > git remote set-head origin main
> > git remote prune --dry-run origin
> >
> > (Note the latter is a --dry-run, repeat the command again without that
> > flag if you are happy with what it said it will do, i.e it will
> > indicate it would prune origin/master, but will also prune any other
> > 'origin' refs you have for branches that no longer exist in the remote
> > repo)
> >
> > On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 at 17:07, Robbie Gemmell
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I was going to begin this tomorrow as noted below, however since I
> > > sent this proposal I have now been both on the receiving end of a
> > > GitHub-driven rename and done some of them for myself...that is, doing
> > > the rename with their tooling as described at
> > > https://github.com/github/renaming.
> > >
> > > It is a nicer process than I outlined below, with some benefits we
> > > wouldnt get doing it the other way. As we can actually push to the ASF
> > > GitHub 'mirrors' if jumping through appropriate hoops first, I decided
> > > to enquire with Infra whether it might actually be possible to use the
> > > GitHub driven approach. It isnt something they have done before, but
> > > said they'll take a look at it, and could perhaps use us to try it
> > > out. I have now raised
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21589 for this either way,
> > > and I'll keep you updated with what is happening.
> > >
> > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 at 12:21, Robbie Gemmell
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi folks,
> > > >
> > > > I would like to propose renaming our git repository default branches
> > > > from "master" to "main" in keeping with general efforts to remove
> > > > offensive language, and also aligning with it being the default naming
> > > > approach on new repositories in various places for some time now.
> > > >
> > > > Having looked into doing this my understanding is that we simply
> > > > create the new branches ourselves, start using them, and then ask
> > > > infra to reconfigure the repository default branch both here and at
> > > > GitHub. After that is done, we can then remove the old branches at our
> > > > own discretion.
> > > >
> > > > Various updates could be needed as part of the process. Some CI jobs
> > > > and scripts
Re: [DISCUSS/NOTICE] Renaming default git repo branches to "main"
On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 09:29, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>
> The remaining repositories have now had their default branches renamed
> from master to main, following the earlier test change.
>
> If you have an existing clone of a repo, you either need to re-clone
> it, or manually update your local repo to ensure it reflects the
> branch name change.
>
> For the latter these are GitHub's suggested steps:
> git branch -m master main
> git fetch origin
> git branch -u origin/main main
>
> (Where 'origin' is the git remote name given to the repo, update this
> as appropriate for your naming choice if different)
>
I notice when renaming my fork branches that GitHub have updated now
updated their suggested steps from previously to incorporate a 4th
step, aimed toward achieving a similar update as the additional steps
I had added myself below.
They now also suggest running this as well in addition after the above steps:
git remote set-head origin -a
>From a search I believe this contacts the remote repo ('origin'),
determines its updated default branch, and updates the remotes head
ref to match, rather than manually setting it and pruning all
non-existing remote refs as I suggested below. Much the same except
the pruning of any other stale refs.
> Note that you will also have to do the rename in your own existing
> GitHub forks if you want them to align. GitHub notifies you of the
> change in its UI when you load your fork repo page, and directs you to
> the relevant space in settings (essentially go to
> https://github.com///settings/branches and then
> click the pencil to rename, type in main).
>
> As a final point, for those who update an existing local repo using
> the steps above, you may spot you still have a 'remote ref' pointing
> to origin/master (e.g if you run git branch -avv you would see an
> entry like: remotes/origin/HEAD -> origin/master). This is a local
> value that only gets set while cloning, based on the default branch of
> the remote repo at the time. Its mostly not important but you can
> update it yourself anyway. I elected to do this, by first explicitly
> setting the ref to origin/main and then pruning any refs for 'origin'
> (or again, whatever you named your repo remote) that dont actually
> exist on the remote repo:
> git remote set-head origin main
> git remote prune --dry-run origin
>
> (Note the latter is a --dry-run, repeat the command again without that
> flag if you are happy with what it said it will do, i.e it will
> indicate it would prune origin/master, but will also prune any other
> 'origin' refs you have for branches that no longer exist in the remote
> repo)
>
> On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 at 17:07, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
> >
> > I was going to begin this tomorrow as noted below, however since I
> > sent this proposal I have now been both on the receiving end of a
> > GitHub-driven rename and done some of them for myself...that is, doing
> > the rename with their tooling as described at
> > https://github.com/github/renaming.
> >
> > It is a nicer process than I outlined below, with some benefits we
> > wouldnt get doing it the other way. As we can actually push to the ASF
> > GitHub 'mirrors' if jumping through appropriate hoops first, I decided
> > to enquire with Infra whether it might actually be possible to use the
> > GitHub driven approach. It isnt something they have done before, but
> > said they'll take a look at it, and could perhaps use us to try it
> > out. I have now raised
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21589 for this either way,
> > and I'll keep you updated with what is happening.
> >
> > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 at 12:21, Robbie Gemmell
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi folks,
> > >
> > > I would like to propose renaming our git repository default branches
> > > from "master" to "main" in keeping with general efforts to remove
> > > offensive language, and also aligning with it being the default naming
> > > approach on new repositories in various places for some time now.
> > >
> > > Having looked into doing this my understanding is that we simply
> > > create the new branches ourselves, start using them, and then ask
> > > infra to reconfigure the repository default branch both here and at
> > > GitHub. After that is done, we can then remove the old branches at our
> > > own discretion.
> > >
> > > Various updates could be needed as part of the process. Some CI jobs
> > > and scripts etc could need to be updated, maybe some READMES etc,
> > > there could be links that need updated, etc. I would take care of
> > > creating the branches, requesting INFRA update the repo defaults, and
> > > ensuring the CI builds and website are in order during/after the
> > > change. Committers would need to update their checkouts accordingly.
> > > Folks with their own CI jobs etc elsewhere may also need to make any
> > > updates as appropriate.
> > >
> > > Barring discussion otherwise, I would look to begin the process next
> > > week on Wednesday 17th.
> > >
> > > I
Re: [DISCUSS/NOTICE] Renaming default git repo branches to "main"
No worries, very easy thing to happen without exact coordination. On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 12:13, Oleksandr Rudyy wrote: > > Hi Robbie, > Thanks for branch removal. > My apologies, I have not checked the state of the repo before the commit. > > Kind Regards, > Alex > > On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 10:31, Robbie Gemmell wrote: > > > > Infra removed the protection from master for me and I have now removed > > the branch again. > > > > (The same protection remains for all the other repositories for now, > > it will be removed if actually needed). > > > > On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 10:21, Robbie Gemmell > > wrote: > > > > > > I see that qpid-broker-j was being worked on over the precise period > > > the renames were being done, and so has unfortunately already had the > > > master branch re-created by a push. > > > > > > I've brought the main up to date with the change, but I cant delete > > > the old master branch as its protected from being rewound. I will > > > enquire with infra. > > > > > > On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 09:29, Robbie Gemmell > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > The remaining repositories have now had their default branches renamed > > > > from master to main, following the earlier test change. > > > > > > > > If you have an existing clone of a repo, you either need to re-clone > > > > it, or manually update your local repo to ensure it reflects the > > > > branch name change. > > > > > > > > For the latter these are GitHub's suggested steps: > > > > git branch -m master main > > > > git fetch origin > > > > git branch -u origin/main main > > > > > > > > (Where 'origin' is the git remote name given to the repo, update this > > > > as appropriate for your naming choice if different) > > > > > > > > Note that you will also have to do the rename in your own existing > > > > GitHub forks if you want them to align. GitHub notifies you of the > > > > change in its UI when you load your fork repo page, and directs you to > > > > the relevant space in settings (essentially go to > > > > https://github.com///settings/branches and then > > > > click the pencil to rename, type in main). > > > > > > > > As a final point, for those who update an existing local repo using > > > > the steps above, you may spot you still have a 'remote ref' pointing > > > > to origin/master (e.g if you run git branch -avv you would see an > > > > entry like: remotes/origin/HEAD -> origin/master). This is a local > > > > value that only gets set while cloning, based on the default branch of > > > > the remote repo at the time. Its mostly not important but you can > > > > update it yourself anyway. I elected to do this, by first explicitly > > > > setting the ref to origin/main and then pruning any refs for 'origin' > > > > (or again, whatever you named your repo remote) that dont actually > > > > exist on the remote repo: > > > > git remote set-head origin main > > > > git remote prune --dry-run origin > > > > > > > > (Note the latter is a --dry-run, repeat the command again without that > > > > flag if you are happy with what it said it will do, i.e it will > > > > indicate it would prune origin/master, but will also prune any other > > > > 'origin' refs you have for branches that no longer exist in the remote > > > > repo) > > > > > > > > On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 at 17:07, Robbie Gemmell > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I was going to begin this tomorrow as noted below, however since I > > > > > sent this proposal I have now been both on the receiving end of a > > > > > GitHub-driven rename and done some of them for myself...that is, doing > > > > > the rename with their tooling as described at > > > > > https://github.com/github/renaming. > > > > > > > > > > It is a nicer process than I outlined below, with some benefits we > > > > > wouldnt get doing it the other way. As we can actually push to the ASF > > > > > GitHub 'mirrors' if jumping through appropriate hoops first, I decided > > > > > to enquire with Infra whether it might actually be possible to use the > > > > > GitHub driven approach. It isnt something they have done before, but > > > > > said they'll take a look at it, and could perhaps use us to try it > > > > > out. I have now raised > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21589 for this either way, > > > > > and I'll keep you updated with what is happening. > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 at 12:21, Robbie Gemmell > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi folks, > > > > > > > > > > > > I would like to propose renaming our git repository default branches > > > > > > from "master" to "main" in keeping with general efforts to remove > > > > > > offensive language, and also aligning with it being the default > > > > > > naming > > > > > > approach on new repositories in various places for some time now. > > > > > > > > > > > > Having looked into doing this my understanding is that we simply > > > > > > create the new branches ourselves, start using them, and then ask > > > > > > infra to reconfigure the
Re: [DISCUSS/NOTICE] Renaming default git repo branches to "main"
Hi Robbie, Thanks for branch removal. My apologies, I have not checked the state of the repo before the commit. Kind Regards, Alex On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 10:31, Robbie Gemmell wrote: > > Infra removed the protection from master for me and I have now removed > the branch again. > > (The same protection remains for all the other repositories for now, > it will be removed if actually needed). > > On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 10:21, Robbie Gemmell wrote: > > > > I see that qpid-broker-j was being worked on over the precise period > > the renames were being done, and so has unfortunately already had the > > master branch re-created by a push. > > > > I've brought the main up to date with the change, but I cant delete > > the old master branch as its protected from being rewound. I will > > enquire with infra. > > > > On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 09:29, Robbie Gemmell > > wrote: > > > > > > The remaining repositories have now had their default branches renamed > > > from master to main, following the earlier test change. > > > > > > If you have an existing clone of a repo, you either need to re-clone > > > it, or manually update your local repo to ensure it reflects the > > > branch name change. > > > > > > For the latter these are GitHub's suggested steps: > > > git branch -m master main > > > git fetch origin > > > git branch -u origin/main main > > > > > > (Where 'origin' is the git remote name given to the repo, update this > > > as appropriate for your naming choice if different) > > > > > > Note that you will also have to do the rename in your own existing > > > GitHub forks if you want them to align. GitHub notifies you of the > > > change in its UI when you load your fork repo page, and directs you to > > > the relevant space in settings (essentially go to > > > https://github.com///settings/branches and then > > > click the pencil to rename, type in main). > > > > > > As a final point, for those who update an existing local repo using > > > the steps above, you may spot you still have a 'remote ref' pointing > > > to origin/master (e.g if you run git branch -avv you would see an > > > entry like: remotes/origin/HEAD -> origin/master). This is a local > > > value that only gets set while cloning, based on the default branch of > > > the remote repo at the time. Its mostly not important but you can > > > update it yourself anyway. I elected to do this, by first explicitly > > > setting the ref to origin/main and then pruning any refs for 'origin' > > > (or again, whatever you named your repo remote) that dont actually > > > exist on the remote repo: > > > git remote set-head origin main > > > git remote prune --dry-run origin > > > > > > (Note the latter is a --dry-run, repeat the command again without that > > > flag if you are happy with what it said it will do, i.e it will > > > indicate it would prune origin/master, but will also prune any other > > > 'origin' refs you have for branches that no longer exist in the remote > > > repo) > > > > > > On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 at 17:07, Robbie Gemmell > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > I was going to begin this tomorrow as noted below, however since I > > > > sent this proposal I have now been both on the receiving end of a > > > > GitHub-driven rename and done some of them for myself...that is, doing > > > > the rename with their tooling as described at > > > > https://github.com/github/renaming. > > > > > > > > It is a nicer process than I outlined below, with some benefits we > > > > wouldnt get doing it the other way. As we can actually push to the ASF > > > > GitHub 'mirrors' if jumping through appropriate hoops first, I decided > > > > to enquire with Infra whether it might actually be possible to use the > > > > GitHub driven approach. It isnt something they have done before, but > > > > said they'll take a look at it, and could perhaps use us to try it > > > > out. I have now raised > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21589 for this either way, > > > > and I'll keep you updated with what is happening. > > > > > > > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 at 12:21, Robbie Gemmell > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi folks, > > > > > > > > > > I would like to propose renaming our git repository default branches > > > > > from "master" to "main" in keeping with general efforts to remove > > > > > offensive language, and also aligning with it being the default naming > > > > > approach on new repositories in various places for some time now. > > > > > > > > > > Having looked into doing this my understanding is that we simply > > > > > create the new branches ourselves, start using them, and then ask > > > > > infra to reconfigure the repository default branch both here and at > > > > > GitHub. After that is done, we can then remove the old branches at our > > > > > own discretion. > > > > > > > > > > Various updates could be needed as part of the process. Some CI jobs > > > > > and scripts etc could need to be updated, maybe some READMES etc, > > > > > there could be
Re: [DISCUSS/NOTICE] Renaming default git repo branches to "main"
Infra removed the protection from master for me and I have now removed the branch again. (The same protection remains for all the other repositories for now, it will be removed if actually needed). On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 10:21, Robbie Gemmell wrote: > > I see that qpid-broker-j was being worked on over the precise period > the renames were being done, and so has unfortunately already had the > master branch re-created by a push. > > I've brought the main up to date with the change, but I cant delete > the old master branch as its protected from being rewound. I will > enquire with infra. > > On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 09:29, Robbie Gemmell wrote: > > > > The remaining repositories have now had their default branches renamed > > from master to main, following the earlier test change. > > > > If you have an existing clone of a repo, you either need to re-clone > > it, or manually update your local repo to ensure it reflects the > > branch name change. > > > > For the latter these are GitHub's suggested steps: > > git branch -m master main > > git fetch origin > > git branch -u origin/main main > > > > (Where 'origin' is the git remote name given to the repo, update this > > as appropriate for your naming choice if different) > > > > Note that you will also have to do the rename in your own existing > > GitHub forks if you want them to align. GitHub notifies you of the > > change in its UI when you load your fork repo page, and directs you to > > the relevant space in settings (essentially go to > > https://github.com///settings/branches and then > > click the pencil to rename, type in main). > > > > As a final point, for those who update an existing local repo using > > the steps above, you may spot you still have a 'remote ref' pointing > > to origin/master (e.g if you run git branch -avv you would see an > > entry like: remotes/origin/HEAD -> origin/master). This is a local > > value that only gets set while cloning, based on the default branch of > > the remote repo at the time. Its mostly not important but you can > > update it yourself anyway. I elected to do this, by first explicitly > > setting the ref to origin/main and then pruning any refs for 'origin' > > (or again, whatever you named your repo remote) that dont actually > > exist on the remote repo: > > git remote set-head origin main > > git remote prune --dry-run origin > > > > (Note the latter is a --dry-run, repeat the command again without that > > flag if you are happy with what it said it will do, i.e it will > > indicate it would prune origin/master, but will also prune any other > > 'origin' refs you have for branches that no longer exist in the remote > > repo) > > > > On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 at 17:07, Robbie Gemmell > > wrote: > > > > > > I was going to begin this tomorrow as noted below, however since I > > > sent this proposal I have now been both on the receiving end of a > > > GitHub-driven rename and done some of them for myself...that is, doing > > > the rename with their tooling as described at > > > https://github.com/github/renaming. > > > > > > It is a nicer process than I outlined below, with some benefits we > > > wouldnt get doing it the other way. As we can actually push to the ASF > > > GitHub 'mirrors' if jumping through appropriate hoops first, I decided > > > to enquire with Infra whether it might actually be possible to use the > > > GitHub driven approach. It isnt something they have done before, but > > > said they'll take a look at it, and could perhaps use us to try it > > > out. I have now raised > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21589 for this either way, > > > and I'll keep you updated with what is happening. > > > > > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 at 12:21, Robbie Gemmell > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi folks, > > > > > > > > I would like to propose renaming our git repository default branches > > > > from "master" to "main" in keeping with general efforts to remove > > > > offensive language, and also aligning with it being the default naming > > > > approach on new repositories in various places for some time now. > > > > > > > > Having looked into doing this my understanding is that we simply > > > > create the new branches ourselves, start using them, and then ask > > > > infra to reconfigure the repository default branch both here and at > > > > GitHub. After that is done, we can then remove the old branches at our > > > > own discretion. > > > > > > > > Various updates could be needed as part of the process. Some CI jobs > > > > and scripts etc could need to be updated, maybe some READMES etc, > > > > there could be links that need updated, etc. I would take care of > > > > creating the branches, requesting INFRA update the repo defaults, and > > > > ensuring the CI builds and website are in order during/after the > > > > change. Committers would need to update their checkouts accordingly. > > > > Folks with their own CI jobs etc elsewhere may also need to make any > > > > updates as
Re: [DISCUSS/NOTICE] Renaming default git repo branches to "main"
I see that qpid-broker-j was being worked on over the precise period the renames were being done, and so has unfortunately already had the master branch re-created by a push. I've brought the main up to date with the change, but I cant delete the old master branch as its protected from being rewound. I will enquire with infra. On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 09:29, Robbie Gemmell wrote: > > The remaining repositories have now had their default branches renamed > from master to main, following the earlier test change. > > If you have an existing clone of a repo, you either need to re-clone > it, or manually update your local repo to ensure it reflects the > branch name change. > > For the latter these are GitHub's suggested steps: > git branch -m master main > git fetch origin > git branch -u origin/main main > > (Where 'origin' is the git remote name given to the repo, update this > as appropriate for your naming choice if different) > > Note that you will also have to do the rename in your own existing > GitHub forks if you want them to align. GitHub notifies you of the > change in its UI when you load your fork repo page, and directs you to > the relevant space in settings (essentially go to > https://github.com///settings/branches and then > click the pencil to rename, type in main). > > As a final point, for those who update an existing local repo using > the steps above, you may spot you still have a 'remote ref' pointing > to origin/master (e.g if you run git branch -avv you would see an > entry like: remotes/origin/HEAD -> origin/master). This is a local > value that only gets set while cloning, based on the default branch of > the remote repo at the time. Its mostly not important but you can > update it yourself anyway. I elected to do this, by first explicitly > setting the ref to origin/main and then pruning any refs for 'origin' > (or again, whatever you named your repo remote) that dont actually > exist on the remote repo: > git remote set-head origin main > git remote prune --dry-run origin > > (Note the latter is a --dry-run, repeat the command again without that > flag if you are happy with what it said it will do, i.e it will > indicate it would prune origin/master, but will also prune any other > 'origin' refs you have for branches that no longer exist in the remote > repo) > > On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 at 17:07, Robbie Gemmell wrote: > > > > I was going to begin this tomorrow as noted below, however since I > > sent this proposal I have now been both on the receiving end of a > > GitHub-driven rename and done some of them for myself...that is, doing > > the rename with their tooling as described at > > https://github.com/github/renaming. > > > > It is a nicer process than I outlined below, with some benefits we > > wouldnt get doing it the other way. As we can actually push to the ASF > > GitHub 'mirrors' if jumping through appropriate hoops first, I decided > > to enquire with Infra whether it might actually be possible to use the > > GitHub driven approach. It isnt something they have done before, but > > said they'll take a look at it, and could perhaps use us to try it > > out. I have now raised > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21589 for this either way, > > and I'll keep you updated with what is happening. > > > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 at 12:21, Robbie Gemmell > > wrote: > > > > > > Hi folks, > > > > > > I would like to propose renaming our git repository default branches > > > from "master" to "main" in keeping with general efforts to remove > > > offensive language, and also aligning with it being the default naming > > > approach on new repositories in various places for some time now. > > > > > > Having looked into doing this my understanding is that we simply > > > create the new branches ourselves, start using them, and then ask > > > infra to reconfigure the repository default branch both here and at > > > GitHub. After that is done, we can then remove the old branches at our > > > own discretion. > > > > > > Various updates could be needed as part of the process. Some CI jobs > > > and scripts etc could need to be updated, maybe some READMES etc, > > > there could be links that need updated, etc. I would take care of > > > creating the branches, requesting INFRA update the repo defaults, and > > > ensuring the CI builds and website are in order during/after the > > > change. Committers would need to update their checkouts accordingly. > > > Folks with their own CI jobs etc elsewhere may also need to make any > > > updates as appropriate. > > > > > > Barring discussion otherwise, I would look to begin the process next > > > week on Wednesday 17th. > > > > > > I would create branches in all our repositories and send a notice mail > > > that it had been done, such that committers then make the swap over > > > for pushing new work. I would then ask infra to make the repository > > > changes, and proceed with updates to CI jobs etc. Perhaps adjusting > > > the READMEs on
Re: [DISCUSS/NOTICE] Renaming default git repo branches to "main"
The remaining repositories have now had their default branches renamed from master to main, following the earlier test change. If you have an existing clone of a repo, you either need to re-clone it, or manually update your local repo to ensure it reflects the branch name change. For the latter these are GitHub's suggested steps: git branch -m master main git fetch origin git branch -u origin/main main (Where 'origin' is the git remote name given to the repo, update this as appropriate for your naming choice if different) Note that you will also have to do the rename in your own existing GitHub forks if you want them to align. GitHub notifies you of the change in its UI when you load your fork repo page, and directs you to the relevant space in settings (essentially go to https://github.com///settings/branches and then click the pencil to rename, type in main). As a final point, for those who update an existing local repo using the steps above, you may spot you still have a 'remote ref' pointing to origin/master (e.g if you run git branch -avv you would see an entry like: remotes/origin/HEAD -> origin/master). This is a local value that only gets set while cloning, based on the default branch of the remote repo at the time. Its mostly not important but you can update it yourself anyway. I elected to do this, by first explicitly setting the ref to origin/main and then pruning any refs for 'origin' (or again, whatever you named your repo remote) that dont actually exist on the remote repo: git remote set-head origin main git remote prune --dry-run origin (Note the latter is a --dry-run, repeat the command again without that flag if you are happy with what it said it will do, i.e it will indicate it would prune origin/master, but will also prune any other 'origin' refs you have for branches that no longer exist in the remote repo) On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 at 17:07, Robbie Gemmell wrote: > > I was going to begin this tomorrow as noted below, however since I > sent this proposal I have now been both on the receiving end of a > GitHub-driven rename and done some of them for myself...that is, doing > the rename with their tooling as described at > https://github.com/github/renaming. > > It is a nicer process than I outlined below, with some benefits we > wouldnt get doing it the other way. As we can actually push to the ASF > GitHub 'mirrors' if jumping through appropriate hoops first, I decided > to enquire with Infra whether it might actually be possible to use the > GitHub driven approach. It isnt something they have done before, but > said they'll take a look at it, and could perhaps use us to try it > out. I have now raised > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21589 for this either way, > and I'll keep you updated with what is happening. > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 at 12:21, Robbie Gemmell wrote: > > > > Hi folks, > > > > I would like to propose renaming our git repository default branches > > from "master" to "main" in keeping with general efforts to remove > > offensive language, and also aligning with it being the default naming > > approach on new repositories in various places for some time now. > > > > Having looked into doing this my understanding is that we simply > > create the new branches ourselves, start using them, and then ask > > infra to reconfigure the repository default branch both here and at > > GitHub. After that is done, we can then remove the old branches at our > > own discretion. > > > > Various updates could be needed as part of the process. Some CI jobs > > and scripts etc could need to be updated, maybe some READMES etc, > > there could be links that need updated, etc. I would take care of > > creating the branches, requesting INFRA update the repo defaults, and > > ensuring the CI builds and website are in order during/after the > > change. Committers would need to update their checkouts accordingly. > > Folks with their own CI jobs etc elsewhere may also need to make any > > updates as appropriate. > > > > Barring discussion otherwise, I would look to begin the process next > > week on Wednesday 17th. > > > > I would create branches in all our repositories and send a notice mail > > that it had been done, such that committers then make the swap over > > for pushing new work. I would then ask infra to make the repository > > changes, and proceed with updates to CI jobs etc. Perhaps adjusting > > the READMEs on master to make things more obvious for anyone looking > > at the repositories while it is still the default and/or both branches > > exist. After all is done, we can consider when/whether to remove the > > old branches. > > > > Robbie - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@qpid.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS/NOTICE] Renaming default git repo branches to "main"
The qpid-jms repo has now had its branch renamed as an initial test. Per https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21589, I have checked things over, updated the Jenkins jobs as needed and checked others. The repo seems fine, though there were a couple of small unexpected things in the process I noted (around certain commit JIRA update comments being replayed, and a couple PRs closing), but neither is a big deal and both would have happened in the other approach anyway. I have mainly noted them for completeness in case it was useful, but intend to ask infra to proceed with renaming the other repository branches. For those with checkouts, these are GitHub's recommended steps to update an existing local repo accordingly, though you can of course just do a fresh clone instead and begin afresh: git branch -m master main git fetch origin git branch -u origin/main main If you update an existing clone like above, you will still have a 'remote ref' pointing to origin/master (e.g if you run git branch -avv you would see an entry like: remotes/origin/HEAD -> origin/master). This is because it's a local value and only gets set at the point of cloning, based on the default branch indicated by the remote repo at the time. Its mostly not important, but you can update it yourself anyway. I elected to do this, by explicitly setting the ref to origin/main and then pruning any origin refs that dont actually exist on the remote repo: git remote set-head origin main git remote prune --dry-run origin (Note the latter is a --dry-run, repeat it again without that if you are happy with what it said it will do, i.e it will indicate it would prune origin/master, but will also prune any other origin refs you have for branches that no longer exist in the remote repo) On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 at 17:07, Robbie Gemmell wrote: > > I was going to begin this tomorrow as noted below, however since I > sent this proposal I have now been both on the receiving end of a > GitHub-driven rename and done some of them for myself...that is, doing > the rename with their tooling as described at > https://github.com/github/renaming. > > It is a nicer process than I outlined below, with some benefits we > wouldnt get doing it the other way. As we can actually push to the ASF > GitHub 'mirrors' if jumping through appropriate hoops first, I decided > to enquire with Infra whether it might actually be possible to use the > GitHub driven approach. It isnt something they have done before, but > said they'll take a look at it, and could perhaps use us to try it > out. I have now raised > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21589 for this either way, > and I'll keep you updated with what is happening. > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 at 12:21, Robbie Gemmell wrote: > > > > Hi folks, > > > > I would like to propose renaming our git repository default branches > > from "master" to "main" in keeping with general efforts to remove > > offensive language, and also aligning with it being the default naming > > approach on new repositories in various places for some time now. > > > > Having looked into doing this my understanding is that we simply > > create the new branches ourselves, start using them, and then ask > > infra to reconfigure the repository default branch both here and at > > GitHub. After that is done, we can then remove the old branches at our > > own discretion. > > > > Various updates could be needed as part of the process. Some CI jobs > > and scripts etc could need to be updated, maybe some READMES etc, > > there could be links that need updated, etc. I would take care of > > creating the branches, requesting INFRA update the repo defaults, and > > ensuring the CI builds and website are in order during/after the > > change. Committers would need to update their checkouts accordingly. > > Folks with their own CI jobs etc elsewhere may also need to make any > > updates as appropriate. > > > > Barring discussion otherwise, I would look to begin the process next > > week on Wednesday 17th. > > > > I would create branches in all our repositories and send a notice mail > > that it had been done, such that committers then make the swap over > > for pushing new work. I would then ask infra to make the repository > > changes, and proceed with updates to CI jobs etc. Perhaps adjusting > > the READMEs on master to make things more obvious for anyone looking > > at the repositories while it is still the default and/or both branches > > exist. After all is done, we can consider when/whether to remove the > > old branches. > > > > Robbie - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@qpid.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS/NOTICE] Renaming default git repo branches to "main"
I was going to begin this tomorrow as noted below, however since I sent this proposal I have now been both on the receiving end of a GitHub-driven rename and done some of them for myself...that is, doing the rename with their tooling as described at https://github.com/github/renaming. It is a nicer process than I outlined below, with some benefits we wouldnt get doing it the other way. As we can actually push to the ASF GitHub 'mirrors' if jumping through appropriate hoops first, I decided to enquire with Infra whether it might actually be possible to use the GitHub driven approach. It isnt something they have done before, but said they'll take a look at it, and could perhaps use us to try it out. I have now raised https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21589 for this either way, and I'll keep you updated with what is happening. On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 at 12:21, Robbie Gemmell wrote: > > Hi folks, > > I would like to propose renaming our git repository default branches > from "master" to "main" in keeping with general efforts to remove > offensive language, and also aligning with it being the default naming > approach on new repositories in various places for some time now. > > Having looked into doing this my understanding is that we simply > create the new branches ourselves, start using them, and then ask > infra to reconfigure the repository default branch both here and at > GitHub. After that is done, we can then remove the old branches at our > own discretion. > > Various updates could be needed as part of the process. Some CI jobs > and scripts etc could need to be updated, maybe some READMES etc, > there could be links that need updated, etc. I would take care of > creating the branches, requesting INFRA update the repo defaults, and > ensuring the CI builds and website are in order during/after the > change. Committers would need to update their checkouts accordingly. > Folks with their own CI jobs etc elsewhere may also need to make any > updates as appropriate. > > Barring discussion otherwise, I would look to begin the process next > week on Wednesday 17th. > > I would create branches in all our repositories and send a notice mail > that it had been done, such that committers then make the swap over > for pushing new work. I would then ask infra to make the repository > changes, and proceed with updates to CI jobs etc. Perhaps adjusting > the READMEs on master to make things more obvious for anyone looking > at the repositories while it is still the default and/or both branches > exist. After all is done, we can consider when/whether to remove the > old branches. > > Robbie - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@qpid.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS/NOTICE] Renaming default git repo branches to "main"
+1 On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 at 12:22, Robbie Gemmell wrote: > > Hi folks, > > I would like to propose renaming our git repository default branches > from "master" to "main" in keeping with general efforts to remove > offensive language, and also aligning with it being the default naming > approach on new repositories in various places for some time now. > > Having looked into doing this my understanding is that we simply > create the new branches ourselves, start using them, and then ask > infra to reconfigure the repository default branch both here and at > GitHub. After that is done, we can then remove the old branches at our > own discretion. > > Various updates could be needed as part of the process. Some CI jobs > and scripts etc could need to be updated, maybe some READMES etc, > there could be links that need updated, etc. I would take care of > creating the branches, requesting INFRA update the repo defaults, and > ensuring the CI builds and website are in order during/after the > change. Committers would need to update their checkouts accordingly. > Folks with their own CI jobs etc elsewhere may also need to make any > updates as appropriate. > > Barring discussion otherwise, I would look to begin the process next > week on Wednesday 17th. > > I would create branches in all our repositories and send a notice mail > that it had been done, such that committers then make the swap over > for pushing new work. I would then ask infra to make the repository > changes, and proceed with updates to CI jobs etc. Perhaps adjusting > the READMEs on master to make things more obvious for anyone looking > at the repositories while it is still the default and/or both branches > exist. After all is done, we can consider when/whether to remove the > old branches. > > Robbie > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@qpid.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@qpid.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS/NOTICE] Renaming default git repo branches to "main"
+1 If you hit any issues please update here. As I’m also doing the same in Artemis On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 1:08 PM Timothy Bish wrote: > +1 > > On 3/11/21 7:21 AM, Robbie Gemmell wrote: > > Hi folks, > > > > I would like to propose renaming our git repository default branches > > from "master" to "main" in keeping with general efforts to remove > > offensive language, and also aligning with it being the default naming > > approach on new repositories in various places for some time now. > > > > Having looked into doing this my understanding is that we simply > > create the new branches ourselves, start using them, and then ask > > infra to reconfigure the repository default branch both here and at > > GitHub. After that is done, we can then remove the old branches at our > > own discretion. > > > > Various updates could be needed as part of the process. Some CI jobs > > and scripts etc could need to be updated, maybe some READMES etc, > > there could be links that need updated, etc. I would take care of > > creating the branches, requesting INFRA update the repo defaults, and > > ensuring the CI builds and website are in order during/after the > > change. Committers would need to update their checkouts accordingly. > > Folks with their own CI jobs etc elsewhere may also need to make any > > updates as appropriate. > > > > Barring discussion otherwise, I would look to begin the process next > > week on Wednesday 17th. > > > > I would create branches in all our repositories and send a notice mail > > that it had been done, such that committers then make the swap over > > for pushing new work. I would then ask infra to make the repository > > changes, and proceed with updates to CI jobs etc. Perhaps adjusting > > the READMEs on master to make things more obvious for anyone looking > > at the repositories while it is still the default and/or both branches > > exist. After all is done, we can consider when/whether to remove the > > old branches. > > > > Robbie > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@qpid.apache.org > > > > . > > > -- > Tim Bish > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@qpid.apache.org > >
Re: [DISCUSS/NOTICE] Renaming default git repo branches to "main"
+1 On 3/11/21 7:21 AM, Robbie Gemmell wrote: Hi folks, I would like to propose renaming our git repository default branches from "master" to "main" in keeping with general efforts to remove offensive language, and also aligning with it being the default naming approach on new repositories in various places for some time now. Having looked into doing this my understanding is that we simply create the new branches ourselves, start using them, and then ask infra to reconfigure the repository default branch both here and at GitHub. After that is done, we can then remove the old branches at our own discretion. Various updates could be needed as part of the process. Some CI jobs and scripts etc could need to be updated, maybe some READMES etc, there could be links that need updated, etc. I would take care of creating the branches, requesting INFRA update the repo defaults, and ensuring the CI builds and website are in order during/after the change. Committers would need to update their checkouts accordingly. Folks with their own CI jobs etc elsewhere may also need to make any updates as appropriate. Barring discussion otherwise, I would look to begin the process next week on Wednesday 17th. I would create branches in all our repositories and send a notice mail that it had been done, such that committers then make the swap over for pushing new work. I would then ask infra to make the repository changes, and proceed with updates to CI jobs etc. Perhaps adjusting the READMEs on master to make things more obvious for anyone looking at the repositories while it is still the default and/or both branches exist. After all is done, we can consider when/whether to remove the old branches. Robbie - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@qpid.apache.org . -- Tim Bish - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@qpid.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS/NOTICE] Renaming default git repo branches to "main"
+1 Thanks for planning this. --Chuck - Original Message - > From: "Robbie Gemmell" > To: "users" > Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2021 7:21:55 AM > Subject: [DISCUSS/NOTICE] Renaming default git repo branches to "main" > > Hi folks, > > I would like to propose renaming our git repository default branches > from "master" to "main" in keeping with general efforts to remove > offensive language, and also aligning with it being the default naming > approach on new repositories in various places for some time now. > > Having looked into doing this my understanding is that we simply > create the new branches ourselves, start using them, and then ask > infra to reconfigure the repository default branch both here and at > GitHub. After that is done, we can then remove the old branches at our > own discretion. > > Various updates could be needed as part of the process. Some CI jobs > and scripts etc could need to be updated, maybe some READMES etc, > there could be links that need updated, etc. I would take care of > creating the branches, requesting INFRA update the repo defaults, and > ensuring the CI builds and website are in order during/after the > change. Committers would need to update their checkouts accordingly. > Folks with their own CI jobs etc elsewhere may also need to make any > updates as appropriate. > > Barring discussion otherwise, I would look to begin the process next > week on Wednesday 17th. > > I would create branches in all our repositories and send a notice mail > that it had been done, such that committers then make the swap over > for pushing new work. I would then ask infra to make the repository > changes, and proceed with updates to CI jobs etc. Perhaps adjusting > the READMEs on master to make things more obvious for anyone looking > at the repositories while it is still the default and/or both branches > exist. After all is done, we can consider when/whether to remove the > old branches. > > Robbie > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@qpid.apache.org > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@qpid.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS/NOTICE] Renaming default git repo branches to "main"
On Thu, Mar 11, 2021 at 7:28 AM Robbie Gemmell wrote: > Hi folks, > > I would like to propose renaming our git repository default branches > from "master" to "main" in keeping with general efforts to remove > offensive language, and also aligning with it being the default naming > approach on new repositories in various places for some time now. > > Having looked into doing this my understanding is that we simply > create the new branches ourselves, start using them, and then ask > infra to reconfigure the repository default branch both here and at > GitHub. After that is done, we can then remove the old branches at our > own discretion. > > Various updates could be needed as part of the process. Some CI jobs > and scripts etc could need to be updated, maybe some READMES etc, > there could be links that need updated, etc. I would take care of > creating the branches, requesting INFRA update the repo defaults, and > ensuring the CI builds and website are in order during/after the > change. Committers would need to update their checkouts accordingly. > Folks with their own CI jobs etc elsewhere may also need to make any > updates as appropriate. > > Barring discussion otherwise, I would look to begin the process next > week on Wednesday 17th. > > I would create branches in all our repositories and send a notice mail > that it had been done, such that committers then make the swap over > for pushing new work. I would then ask infra to make the repository > changes, and proceed with updates to CI jobs etc. Perhaps adjusting > the READMEs on master to make things more obvious for anyone looking > at the repositories while it is still the default and/or both branches > exist. After all is done, we can consider when/whether to remove the > old branches. > +1 Thanks for doing this Robbie. > > > Robbie > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@qpid.apache.org > >
[DISCUSS/NOTICE] Renaming default git repo branches to "main"
Hi folks, I would like to propose renaming our git repository default branches from "master" to "main" in keeping with general efforts to remove offensive language, and also aligning with it being the default naming approach on new repositories in various places for some time now. Having looked into doing this my understanding is that we simply create the new branches ourselves, start using them, and then ask infra to reconfigure the repository default branch both here and at GitHub. After that is done, we can then remove the old branches at our own discretion. Various updates could be needed as part of the process. Some CI jobs and scripts etc could need to be updated, maybe some READMES etc, there could be links that need updated, etc. I would take care of creating the branches, requesting INFRA update the repo defaults, and ensuring the CI builds and website are in order during/after the change. Committers would need to update their checkouts accordingly. Folks with their own CI jobs etc elsewhere may also need to make any updates as appropriate. Barring discussion otherwise, I would look to begin the process next week on Wednesday 17th. I would create branches in all our repositories and send a notice mail that it had been done, such that committers then make the swap over for pushing new work. I would then ask infra to make the repository changes, and proceed with updates to CI jobs etc. Perhaps adjusting the READMEs on master to make things more obvious for anyone looking at the repositories while it is still the default and/or both branches exist. After all is done, we can consider when/whether to remove the old branches. Robbie - To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@qpid.apache.org
