I think there could be some benefits for this, but yes, we'd need to update the
contribution guidelines to be really clear. Perhaps the easiest thing to do
would be to clone the cf-conventions repo and rename that so that topical pull
requests / discussions go there, and then once things have
Hi all,
I am told that PCMDI's maintenance of the Trac site here at LLNL is becoming
more fragile for a number of technical reasons and our scarce resources to
invest in it also make it problematic, so from a practical perspective our
systems folks here would favor moving to github (although it
Dear All,
I would be supportive of a clean break from Trac -- and it's clear that there
is a constituency in the community that would prefer that path. I think it is
also clear that we are suggesting that outcome in the near future anyways, but
potentially not an immediate retirement of Trac.
1mn googling: https://github.com/mavam/trac-hub
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/cf-convention/cf-conventions/issues/130#issuecomment-400702880
why not simply import all past TRAC tickets and convert them into github
issues?
I am sure we can find that kind of scripts, possibly in a github repo!
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
So all ticket numbers below 200 belong to Trac; above 200 to GitHub.
+1
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/cf-convention/cf-conventions/issues/130#issuecomment-400701342
It is manageable only with additional context, for example: `Trac #101` or `GH
#101`.
Alternatively, GitHub's API can be used to create and close dummy issues until
the internal numbering is bumped up above the highest ticket number on Trac. Or
go all the way to, say, 200. So all ticket
