Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
+1 for using Gitbox Timo Am 16.05.18 um 17:43 schrieb Kenneth Knowles: Actually, GitHub has a feature so you do not require picture-perfect commits: https://help.github.com/articles/allowing-changes-to-a-pull-request-branch-created-from-a-fork/ If the owner of the PR checks the box, it will give committers write access to their branch (on their fork). A nice bonus is you can make the changes and then continue the review, too. Kenn On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 8:31 AM Stefan Richter <s.rich...@data-artisans.com> wrote: +1 Am 16.05.2018 um 12:40 schrieb Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org>: Hello, during the discussion about how to better manage pull requests [1] the topic of GitBox integration came up again. This seems like a good opportunity to restart this discussion that we had about a year ago [2]. * What is GitBox Essentially, GitBox allow us to use GitHub features. We can decide for ourselves which features we want enabled. We could merge PRs directly on GitHub at the button of a click. That said the merge functionality is fairly limited and would require picture-perfect commits in the pull requests. Commits can be squashed, but you cannot amend commits in any way, be it fixing typos or changing the commit message. Realistically this limits how much we can use this feature, and it may lead to a decline in the quality of commit messages. Labels can be useful for the management of PRs as (ready for review, delayed for next release, waiting for changes). This is really what I'm personally most interested in. We've been using GitBox for flink-shaded for a while now and i didn't run into any issue. AFAIK GitBox is also the default for new projects. * What this means for committers: The apache git remote URL will change, which will require all committers to update their git setup. This also implies that we may have to update the website build scripts. The new URL would (probably) be /https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/flink.git/. To make use of GitHub features you have to link your GitHub and Apache accounts. [3] This also requires setting up two-factor authentication on GitHub. Update the scm entry in the parent pom.xml. * What this means for contributors: Nothing should change for contributors. Small changes (like typos) may be merged more quickly, if the commit message is appropriate, as it could be done directly through GitHub. [1] http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/Closing-automatically-inactive-pull-requests-tt22248.html [2] http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/DISCUSS-GitBox-td18027.html [3] https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
I couldn't find any such setting in one of my repos :( On 16.05.2018 21:03, Kenneth Knowles wrote: When I open a pull request to Beam, it is on by default. I have just run an experiment to see if it is remembering the last option I checked and it is not. Even after I disable it for one pull request, the next one has it checked again. So it may be a repository-level setting that you can set up. Kenn On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 11:19 AM Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: This however has to be enabled by the contributor, separately for each PR. We'll see how often we get the opportunity to use it. On 16.05.2018 17:43, Kenneth Knowles wrote: Actually, GitHub has a feature so you do not require picture-perfect commits: https://help.github.com/articles/allowing-changes-to-a-pull-request-branch-created-from-a-fork/ If the owner of the PR checks the box, it will give committers write access to their branch (on their fork). A nice bonus is you can make the changes and then continue the review, too. Kenn On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 8:31 AM Stefan Richter < s.rich...@data-artisans.com> wrote: +1 Am 16.05.2018 um 12:40 schrieb Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org>: Hello, during the discussion about how to better manage pull requests [1] the topic of GitBox integration came up again. This seems like a good opportunity to restart this discussion that we had about a year ago [2]. * What is GitBox Essentially, GitBox allow us to use GitHub features. We can decide for ourselves which features we want enabled. We could merge PRs directly on GitHub at the button of a click. That said the merge functionality is fairly limited and would require picture-perfect commits in the pull requests. Commits can be squashed, but you cannot amend commits in any way, be it fixing typos or changing the commit message. Realistically this limits how much we can use this feature, and it may lead to a decline in the quality of commit messages. Labels can be useful for the management of PRs as (ready for review, delayed for next release, waiting for changes). This is really what I'm personally most interested in. We've been using GitBox for flink-shaded for a while now and i didn't run into any issue. AFAIK GitBox is also the default for new projects. * What this means for committers: The apache git remote URL will change, which will require all committers to update their git setup. This also implies that we may have to update the website build scripts. The new URL would (probably) be /https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/flink.git/. To make use of GitHub features you have to link your GitHub and Apache accounts. [3] This also requires setting up two-factor authentication on GitHub. Update the scm entry in the parent pom.xml. * What this means for contributors: Nothing should change for contributors. Small changes (like typos) may be merged more quickly, if the commit message is appropriate, as it could be done directly through GitHub. [1] http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/Closing-automatically-inactive-pull-requests-tt22248.html [2] http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/DISCUSS-GitBox-td18027.html [3] https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
Rong Rong, see my reply. It can be enabled by default. I think it may be already. Kenn On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 4:24 PM Rong Rong <walter...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 > > One question regarding "This however has to be enabled by the contributor, > separately for each PR." > can it be by default enable when creating PR? > > On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 2:08 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > +1 > > Original message From: Shuyi Chen <suez1...@gmail.com> > > Date: 5/16/18 1:12 PM (GMT-08:00) To: dev@flink.apache.org Subject: > Re: > > [DISCUSS] GitBox > > +1 :) A lot of projects <https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf> are > already > > using it. > > > > On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 3:40 AM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > during the discussion about how to better manage pull requests [1] the > > > topic of GitBox integration came up again. > > > > > > This seems like a good opportunity to restart this discussion that we > had > > > about a year ago [2]. > > > > > > * What is GitBox > > > > > >Essentially, GitBox allow us to use GitHub features. > > >We can decide for ourselves which features we want enabled. > > > > > >We could merge PRs directly on GitHub at the button of a click. > > >That said the merge functionality is fairly limited and would > > >require picture-perfect commits in the pull requests. > > >Commits can be squashed, but you cannot amend commits in any way, be > > >it fixing typos or changing the commit message. Realistically this > > >limits how much we can use this feature, and it may lead to a > > >decline in the quality of commit messages. > > > > > >Labels can be useful for the management of PRs as (ready for review, > > >delayed for next release, waiting for changes). This is really what > > >I'm personally most interested in. > > > > > >We've been using GitBox for flink-shaded for a while now and i > > >didn't run into any issue. AFAIK GitBox is also the default for new > > >projects. > > > > > > * What this means for committers: > > > > > >The apache git remote URL will change, which will require all > > >committers to update their git setup. > > >This also implies that we may have to update the website build > > scripts. > > >The new URL would (probably) be > > >/https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/flink.git/. > > > > > >To make use of GitHub features you have to link your GitHub and > > >Apache accounts. [3] > > >This also requires setting up two-factor authentication on GitHub. > > > > > >Update the scm entry in the parent pom.xml. > > > > > > * What this means for contributors: > > > > > >Nothing should change for contributors. Small changes (like typos) > > >may be merged more quickly, if the commit message is appropriate, as > > >it could be done directly through GitHub. > > > > > > [1] http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble. > > > com/Closing-automatically-inactive-pull-requests-tt22248.html > > > [2] http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble. > > > com/DISCUSS-GitBox-td18027.html > > > [3] https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/ > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > "So you have to trust that the dots will somehow connect in your future." > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
+1 One question regarding "This however has to be enabled by the contributor, separately for each PR." can it be by default enable when creating PR? On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 2:08 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 > Original message From: Shuyi Chen <suez1...@gmail.com> > Date: 5/16/18 1:12 PM (GMT-08:00) To: dev@flink.apache.org Subject: Re: > [DISCUSS] GitBox > +1 :) A lot of projects <https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf> are already > using it. > > On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 3:40 AM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > during the discussion about how to better manage pull requests [1] the > > topic of GitBox integration came up again. > > > > This seems like a good opportunity to restart this discussion that we had > > about a year ago [2]. > > > > * What is GitBox > > > >Essentially, GitBox allow us to use GitHub features. > >We can decide for ourselves which features we want enabled. > > > >We could merge PRs directly on GitHub at the button of a click. > >That said the merge functionality is fairly limited and would > >require picture-perfect commits in the pull requests. > >Commits can be squashed, but you cannot amend commits in any way, be > >it fixing typos or changing the commit message. Realistically this > >limits how much we can use this feature, and it may lead to a > >decline in the quality of commit messages. > > > >Labels can be useful for the management of PRs as (ready for review, > >delayed for next release, waiting for changes). This is really what > >I'm personally most interested in. > > > >We've been using GitBox for flink-shaded for a while now and i > >didn't run into any issue. AFAIK GitBox is also the default for new > >projects. > > > > * What this means for committers: > > > >The apache git remote URL will change, which will require all > >committers to update their git setup. > >This also implies that we may have to update the website build > scripts. > >The new URL would (probably) be > >/https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/flink.git/. > > > >To make use of GitHub features you have to link your GitHub and > >Apache accounts. [3] > >This also requires setting up two-factor authentication on GitHub. > > > >Update the scm entry in the parent pom.xml. > > > > * What this means for contributors: > > > >Nothing should change for contributors. Small changes (like typos) > > may be merged more quickly, if the commit message is appropriate, as > >it could be done directly through GitHub. > > > > [1] http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble. > > com/Closing-automatically-inactive-pull-requests-tt22248.html > > [2] http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble. > > com/DISCUSS-GitBox-td18027.html > > [3] https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/ > > > > > > -- > "So you have to trust that the dots will somehow connect in your future." >
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
+1 Original message From: Shuyi Chen <suez1...@gmail.com> Date: 5/16/18 1:12 PM (GMT-08:00) To: dev@flink.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox +1 :) A lot of projects <https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf> are already using it. On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 3:40 AM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: > Hello, > > during the discussion about how to better manage pull requests [1] the > topic of GitBox integration came up again. > > This seems like a good opportunity to restart this discussion that we had > about a year ago [2]. > > * What is GitBox > > Essentially, GitBox allow us to use GitHub features. > We can decide for ourselves which features we want enabled. > > We could merge PRs directly on GitHub at the button of a click. > That said the merge functionality is fairly limited and would > require picture-perfect commits in the pull requests. > Commits can be squashed, but you cannot amend commits in any way, be > it fixing typos or changing the commit message. Realistically this > limits how much we can use this feature, and it may lead to a > decline in the quality of commit messages. > > Labels can be useful for the management of PRs as (ready for review, > delayed for next release, waiting for changes). This is really what > I'm personally most interested in. > > We've been using GitBox for flink-shaded for a while now and i > didn't run into any issue. AFAIK GitBox is also the default for new > projects. > > * What this means for committers: > > The apache git remote URL will change, which will require all > committers to update their git setup. > This also implies that we may have to update the website build scripts. > The new URL would (probably) be > /https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/flink.git/. > > To make use of GitHub features you have to link your GitHub and > Apache accounts. [3] > This also requires setting up two-factor authentication on GitHub. > > Update the scm entry in the parent pom.xml. > > * What this means for contributors: > > Nothing should change for contributors. Small changes (like typos) > may be merged more quickly, if the commit message is appropriate, as > it could be done directly through GitHub. > > [1] http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble. > com/Closing-automatically-inactive-pull-requests-tt22248.html > [2] http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble. > com/DISCUSS-GitBox-td18027.html > [3] https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/ > -- "So you have to trust that the dots will somehow connect in your future."
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
+1 :) A lot of projects <https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf> are already using it. On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 3:40 AM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: > Hello, > > during the discussion about how to better manage pull requests [1] the > topic of GitBox integration came up again. > > This seems like a good opportunity to restart this discussion that we had > about a year ago [2]. > > * What is GitBox > >Essentially, GitBox allow us to use GitHub features. >We can decide for ourselves which features we want enabled. > >We could merge PRs directly on GitHub at the button of a click. >That said the merge functionality is fairly limited and would >require picture-perfect commits in the pull requests. >Commits can be squashed, but you cannot amend commits in any way, be >it fixing typos or changing the commit message. Realistically this >limits how much we can use this feature, and it may lead to a >decline in the quality of commit messages. > >Labels can be useful for the management of PRs as (ready for review, >delayed for next release, waiting for changes). This is really what >I'm personally most interested in. > >We've been using GitBox for flink-shaded for a while now and i >didn't run into any issue. AFAIK GitBox is also the default for new >projects. > > * What this means for committers: > >The apache git remote URL will change, which will require all >committers to update their git setup. >This also implies that we may have to update the website build scripts. >The new URL would (probably) be >/https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/flink.git/. > >To make use of GitHub features you have to link your GitHub and >Apache accounts. [3] >This also requires setting up two-factor authentication on GitHub. > >Update the scm entry in the parent pom.xml. > > * What this means for contributors: > >Nothing should change for contributors. Small changes (like typos) >may be merged more quickly, if the commit message is appropriate, as >it could be done directly through GitHub. > > [1] http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble. > com/Closing-automatically-inactive-pull-requests-tt22248.html > [2] http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble. > com/DISCUSS-GitBox-td18027.html > [3] https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/ > -- "So you have to trust that the dots will somehow connect in your future."
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
+1 Kenneth Knowles <k...@google.com.invalid> schrieb am Mi., 16. Mai 2018, 21:04: > When I open a pull request to Beam, it is on by default. I have just run an > experiment to see if it is remembering the last option I checked and it is > not. Even after I disable it for one pull request, the next one has it > checked again. So it may be a repository-level setting that you can set up. > > Kenn > > On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 11:19 AM Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > This however has to be enabled by the contributor, separately for each > PR. > > We'll see how often we get the opportunity to use it. > > > > On 16.05.2018 17:43, Kenneth Knowles wrote: > > > Actually, GitHub has a feature so you do not require picture-perfect > > > commits: > > > > > > https://help.github.com/articles/allowing-changes-to-a-pull-request-branch-created-from-a-fork/ > > > > > > If the owner of the PR checks the box, it will give committers write > > access > > > to their branch (on their fork). A nice bonus is you can make the > changes > > > and then continue the review, too. > > > > > > Kenn > > > > > > On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 8:31 AM Stefan Richter < > > s.rich...@data-artisans.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> +1 > > >> > > >>> Am 16.05.2018 um 12:40 schrieb Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org > >: > > >>> > > >>> Hello, > > >>> > > >>> during the discussion about how to better manage pull requests [1] > the > > >> topic of GitBox integration came up again. > > >>> This seems like a good opportunity to restart this discussion that we > > >> had about a year ago [2]. > > >>> * What is GitBox > > >>> > > >>>Essentially, GitBox allow us to use GitHub features. > > >>>We can decide for ourselves which features we want enabled. > > >>> > > >>>We could merge PRs directly on GitHub at the button of a click. > > >>>That said the merge functionality is fairly limited and would > > >>>require picture-perfect commits in the pull requests. > > >>>Commits can be squashed, but you cannot amend commits in any way, > be > > >>>it fixing typos or changing the commit message. Realistically this > > >>>limits how much we can use this feature, and it may lead to a > > >>>decline in the quality of commit messages. > > >>> > > >>>Labels can be useful for the management of PRs as (ready for > review, > > >>>delayed for next release, waiting for changes). This is really > what > > >>>I'm personally most interested in. > > >>> > > >>>We've been using GitBox for flink-shaded for a while now and i > > >>>didn't run into any issue. AFAIK GitBox is also the default for > new > > >>>projects. > > >>> > > >>> * What this means for committers: > > >>> > > >>>The apache git remote URL will change, which will require all > > >>>committers to update their git setup. > > >>>This also implies that we may have to update the website build > > scripts. > > >>>The new URL would (probably) be > > >>>/https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/flink.git/. > > >>> > > >>>To make use of GitHub features you have to link your GitHub and > > >>>Apache accounts. [3] > > >>>This also requires setting up two-factor authentication on GitHub. > > >>> > > >>>Update the scm entry in the parent pom.xml. > > >>> > > >>> * What this means for contributors: > > >>> > > >>>Nothing should change for contributors. Small changes (like typos) > > >>>may be merged more quickly, if the commit message is appropriate, > as > > >>>it could be done directly through GitHub. > > >>> > > >>> [1] > > >> > > > http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/Closing-automatically-inactive-pull-requests-tt22248.html > > >>> [2] > > >> > > > http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/DISCUSS-GitBox-td18027.html > > >>> [3] https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/ > > >> > > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
When I open a pull request to Beam, it is on by default. I have just run an experiment to see if it is remembering the last option I checked and it is not. Even after I disable it for one pull request, the next one has it checked again. So it may be a repository-level setting that you can set up. Kenn On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 11:19 AM Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: > This however has to be enabled by the contributor, separately for each PR. > We'll see how often we get the opportunity to use it. > > On 16.05.2018 17:43, Kenneth Knowles wrote: > > Actually, GitHub has a feature so you do not require picture-perfect > > commits: > > > https://help.github.com/articles/allowing-changes-to-a-pull-request-branch-created-from-a-fork/ > > > > If the owner of the PR checks the box, it will give committers write > access > > to their branch (on their fork). A nice bonus is you can make the changes > > and then continue the review, too. > > > > Kenn > > > > On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 8:31 AM Stefan Richter < > s.rich...@data-artisans.com> > > wrote: > > > >> +1 > >> > >>> Am 16.05.2018 um 12:40 schrieb Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org>: > >>> > >>> Hello, > >>> > >>> during the discussion about how to better manage pull requests [1] the > >> topic of GitBox integration came up again. > >>> This seems like a good opportunity to restart this discussion that we > >> had about a year ago [2]. > >>> * What is GitBox > >>> > >>>Essentially, GitBox allow us to use GitHub features. > >>>We can decide for ourselves which features we want enabled. > >>> > >>>We could merge PRs directly on GitHub at the button of a click. > >>>That said the merge functionality is fairly limited and would > >>>require picture-perfect commits in the pull requests. > >>>Commits can be squashed, but you cannot amend commits in any way, be > >>>it fixing typos or changing the commit message. Realistically this > >>>limits how much we can use this feature, and it may lead to a > >>>decline in the quality of commit messages. > >>> > >>>Labels can be useful for the management of PRs as (ready for review, > >>>delayed for next release, waiting for changes). This is really what > >>>I'm personally most interested in. > >>> > >>>We've been using GitBox for flink-shaded for a while now and i > >>>didn't run into any issue. AFAIK GitBox is also the default for new > >>>projects. > >>> > >>> * What this means for committers: > >>> > >>>The apache git remote URL will change, which will require all > >>>committers to update their git setup. > >>>This also implies that we may have to update the website build > scripts. > >>>The new URL would (probably) be > >>>/https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/flink.git/. > >>> > >>>To make use of GitHub features you have to link your GitHub and > >>>Apache accounts. [3] > >>> This also requires setting up two-factor authentication on GitHub. > >>> > >>>Update the scm entry in the parent pom.xml. > >>> > >>> * What this means for contributors: > >>> > >>>Nothing should change for contributors. Small changes (like typos) > >>>may be merged more quickly, if the commit message is appropriate, as > >>>it could be done directly through GitHub. > >>> > >>> [1] > >> > http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/Closing-automatically-inactive-pull-requests-tt22248.html > >>> [2] > >> > http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/DISCUSS-GitBox-td18027.html > >>> [3] https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/ > >> > >
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
This however has to be enabled by the contributor, separately for each PR. We'll see how often we get the opportunity to use it. On 16.05.2018 17:43, Kenneth Knowles wrote: Actually, GitHub has a feature so you do not require picture-perfect commits: https://help.github.com/articles/allowing-changes-to-a-pull-request-branch-created-from-a-fork/ If the owner of the PR checks the box, it will give committers write access to their branch (on their fork). A nice bonus is you can make the changes and then continue the review, too. Kenn On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 8:31 AM Stefan Richter <s.rich...@data-artisans.com> wrote: +1 Am 16.05.2018 um 12:40 schrieb Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org>: Hello, during the discussion about how to better manage pull requests [1] the topic of GitBox integration came up again. This seems like a good opportunity to restart this discussion that we had about a year ago [2]. * What is GitBox Essentially, GitBox allow us to use GitHub features. We can decide for ourselves which features we want enabled. We could merge PRs directly on GitHub at the button of a click. That said the merge functionality is fairly limited and would require picture-perfect commits in the pull requests. Commits can be squashed, but you cannot amend commits in any way, be it fixing typos or changing the commit message. Realistically this limits how much we can use this feature, and it may lead to a decline in the quality of commit messages. Labels can be useful for the management of PRs as (ready for review, delayed for next release, waiting for changes). This is really what I'm personally most interested in. We've been using GitBox for flink-shaded for a while now and i didn't run into any issue. AFAIK GitBox is also the default for new projects. * What this means for committers: The apache git remote URL will change, which will require all committers to update their git setup. This also implies that we may have to update the website build scripts. The new URL would (probably) be /https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/flink.git/. To make use of GitHub features you have to link your GitHub and Apache accounts. [3] This also requires setting up two-factor authentication on GitHub. Update the scm entry in the parent pom.xml. * What this means for contributors: Nothing should change for contributors. Small changes (like typos) may be merged more quickly, if the commit message is appropriate, as it could be done directly through GitHub. [1] http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/Closing-automatically-inactive-pull-requests-tt22248.html [2] http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/DISCUSS-GitBox-td18027.html [3] https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
+1 On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 2:09 PM, Thomas Weise <t...@apache.org> wrote: > +1 > > > On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 8:31 AM, Stefan Richter < > s.rich...@data-artisans.com > > wrote: > > > +1 > > > > > Am 16.05.2018 um 12:40 schrieb Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org>: > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > during the discussion about how to better manage pull requests [1] the > > topic of GitBox integration came up again. > > > > > > This seems like a good opportunity to restart this discussion that we > > had about a year ago [2]. > > > > > > * What is GitBox > > > > > > Essentially, GitBox allow us to use GitHub features. > > > We can decide for ourselves which features we want enabled. > > > > > > We could merge PRs directly on GitHub at the button of a click. > > > That said the merge functionality is fairly limited and would > > > require picture-perfect commits in the pull requests. > > > Commits can be squashed, but you cannot amend commits in any way, be > > > it fixing typos or changing the commit message. Realistically this > > > limits how much we can use this feature, and it may lead to a > > > decline in the quality of commit messages. > > > > > > Labels can be useful for the management of PRs as (ready for review, > > > delayed for next release, waiting for changes). This is really what > > > I'm personally most interested in. > > > > > > We've been using GitBox for flink-shaded for a while now and i > > > didn't run into any issue. AFAIK GitBox is also the default for new > > > projects. > > > > > > * What this means for committers: > > > > > > The apache git remote URL will change, which will require all > > > committers to update their git setup. > > > This also implies that we may have to update the website build > scripts. > > > The new URL would (probably) be > > > /https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/flink.git/. > > > > > > To make use of GitHub features you have to link your GitHub and > > > Apache accounts. [3] > > > This also requires setting up two-factor authentication on GitHub. > > > > > > Update the scm entry in the parent pom.xml. > > > > > > * What this means for contributors: > > > > > > Nothing should change for contributors. Small changes (like typos) > > > may be merged more quickly, if the commit message is appropriate, as > > > it could be done directly through GitHub. > > > > > > [1] http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3. > > nabble.com/Closing-automatically-inactive-pull-requests-tt22248.html > > > [2] http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3. > > nabble.com/DISCUSS-GitBox-td18027.html > > > [3] https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/ > > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
+1 Regards JB Le 16 mai 2018 à 20:09, à 20:09, Thomas Weise <t...@apache.org> a écrit: >+1 > > >On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 8:31 AM, Stefan Richter ><s.rich...@data-artisans.com >> wrote: > >> +1 >> >> > Am 16.05.2018 um 12:40 schrieb Chesnay Schepler ><ches...@apache.org>: >> > >> > Hello, >> > >> > during the discussion about how to better manage pull requests [1] >the >> topic of GitBox integration came up again. >> > >> > This seems like a good opportunity to restart this discussion that >we >> had about a year ago [2]. >> > >> > * What is GitBox >> > >> > Essentially, GitBox allow us to use GitHub features. >> > We can decide for ourselves which features we want enabled. >> > >> > We could merge PRs directly on GitHub at the button of a click. >> > That said the merge functionality is fairly limited and would >> > require picture-perfect commits in the pull requests. >> > Commits can be squashed, but you cannot amend commits in any way, >be >> > it fixing typos or changing the commit message. Realistically >this >> > limits how much we can use this feature, and it may lead to a >> > decline in the quality of commit messages. >> > >> > Labels can be useful for the management of PRs as (ready for >review, >> > delayed for next release, waiting for changes). This is really >what >> > I'm personally most interested in. >> > >> > We've been using GitBox for flink-shaded for a while now and i >> > didn't run into any issue. AFAIK GitBox is also the default for >new >> > projects. >> > >> > * What this means for committers: >> > >> > The apache git remote URL will change, which will require all >> > committers to update their git setup. >> > This also implies that we may have to update the website build >scripts. >> > The new URL would (probably) be >> > /https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/flink.git/. >> > >> > To make use of GitHub features you have to link your GitHub and >> > Apache accounts. [3] >> > This also requires setting up two-factor authentication on >GitHub. >> > >> > Update the scm entry in the parent pom.xml. >> > >> > * What this means for contributors: >> > >> > Nothing should change for contributors. Small changes (like >typos) >> > may be merged more quickly, if the commit message is appropriate, >as >> > it could be done directly through GitHub. >> > >> > [1] http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3. >> nabble.com/Closing-automatically-inactive-pull-requests-tt22248.html >> > [2] http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3. >> nabble.com/DISCUSS-GitBox-td18027.html >> > [3] https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/ >> >>
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
+1 On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 8:31 AM, Stefan Richter <s.rich...@data-artisans.com > wrote: > +1 > > > Am 16.05.2018 um 12:40 schrieb Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org>: > > > > Hello, > > > > during the discussion about how to better manage pull requests [1] the > topic of GitBox integration came up again. > > > > This seems like a good opportunity to restart this discussion that we > had about a year ago [2]. > > > > * What is GitBox > > > > Essentially, GitBox allow us to use GitHub features. > > We can decide for ourselves which features we want enabled. > > > > We could merge PRs directly on GitHub at the button of a click. > > That said the merge functionality is fairly limited and would > > require picture-perfect commits in the pull requests. > > Commits can be squashed, but you cannot amend commits in any way, be > > it fixing typos or changing the commit message. Realistically this > > limits how much we can use this feature, and it may lead to a > > decline in the quality of commit messages. > > > > Labels can be useful for the management of PRs as (ready for review, > > delayed for next release, waiting for changes). This is really what > > I'm personally most interested in. > > > > We've been using GitBox for flink-shaded for a while now and i > > didn't run into any issue. AFAIK GitBox is also the default for new > > projects. > > > > * What this means for committers: > > > > The apache git remote URL will change, which will require all > > committers to update their git setup. > > This also implies that we may have to update the website build scripts. > > The new URL would (probably) be > > /https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/flink.git/. > > > > To make use of GitHub features you have to link your GitHub and > > Apache accounts. [3] > > This also requires setting up two-factor authentication on GitHub. > > > > Update the scm entry in the parent pom.xml. > > > > * What this means for contributors: > > > > Nothing should change for contributors. Small changes (like typos) > > may be merged more quickly, if the commit message is appropriate, as > > it could be done directly through GitHub. > > > > [1] http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3. > nabble.com/Closing-automatically-inactive-pull-requests-tt22248.html > > [2] http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3. > nabble.com/DISCUSS-GitBox-td18027.html > > [3] https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/ > >
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
Actually, GitHub has a feature so you do not require picture-perfect commits: https://help.github.com/articles/allowing-changes-to-a-pull-request-branch-created-from-a-fork/ If the owner of the PR checks the box, it will give committers write access to their branch (on their fork). A nice bonus is you can make the changes and then continue the review, too. Kenn On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 8:31 AM Stefan Richter <s.rich...@data-artisans.com> wrote: > +1 > > > Am 16.05.2018 um 12:40 schrieb Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org>: > > > > Hello, > > > > during the discussion about how to better manage pull requests [1] the > topic of GitBox integration came up again. > > > > This seems like a good opportunity to restart this discussion that we > had about a year ago [2]. > > > > * What is GitBox > > > > Essentially, GitBox allow us to use GitHub features. > > We can decide for ourselves which features we want enabled. > > > > We could merge PRs directly on GitHub at the button of a click. > > That said the merge functionality is fairly limited and would > > require picture-perfect commits in the pull requests. > > Commits can be squashed, but you cannot amend commits in any way, be > > it fixing typos or changing the commit message. Realistically this > > limits how much we can use this feature, and it may lead to a > > decline in the quality of commit messages. > > > > Labels can be useful for the management of PRs as (ready for review, > > delayed for next release, waiting for changes). This is really what > > I'm personally most interested in. > > > > We've been using GitBox for flink-shaded for a while now and i > > didn't run into any issue. AFAIK GitBox is also the default for new > > projects. > > > > * What this means for committers: > > > > The apache git remote URL will change, which will require all > > committers to update their git setup. > > This also implies that we may have to update the website build scripts. > > The new URL would (probably) be > > /https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/flink.git/. > > > > To make use of GitHub features you have to link your GitHub and > > Apache accounts. [3] > > This also requires setting up two-factor authentication on GitHub. > > > > Update the scm entry in the parent pom.xml. > > > > * What this means for contributors: > > > > Nothing should change for contributors. Small changes (like typos) > > may be merged more quickly, if the commit message is appropriate, as > > it could be done directly through GitHub. > > > > [1] > http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/Closing-automatically-inactive-pull-requests-tt22248.html > > [2] > http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/DISCUSS-GitBox-td18027.html > > [3] https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/ > >
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
+1 > Am 16.05.2018 um 12:40 schrieb Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org>: > > Hello, > > during the discussion about how to better manage pull requests [1] the topic > of GitBox integration came up again. > > This seems like a good opportunity to restart this discussion that we had > about a year ago [2]. > > * What is GitBox > > Essentially, GitBox allow us to use GitHub features. > We can decide for ourselves which features we want enabled. > > We could merge PRs directly on GitHub at the button of a click. > That said the merge functionality is fairly limited and would > require picture-perfect commits in the pull requests. > Commits can be squashed, but you cannot amend commits in any way, be > it fixing typos or changing the commit message. Realistically this > limits how much we can use this feature, and it may lead to a > decline in the quality of commit messages. > > Labels can be useful for the management of PRs as (ready for review, > delayed for next release, waiting for changes). This is really what > I'm personally most interested in. > > We've been using GitBox for flink-shaded for a while now and i > didn't run into any issue. AFAIK GitBox is also the default for new > projects. > > * What this means for committers: > > The apache git remote URL will change, which will require all > committers to update their git setup. > This also implies that we may have to update the website build scripts. > The new URL would (probably) be > /https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/flink.git/. > > To make use of GitHub features you have to link your GitHub and > Apache accounts. [3] > This also requires setting up two-factor authentication on GitHub. > > Update the scm entry in the parent pom.xml. > > * What this means for contributors: > > Nothing should change for contributors. Small changes (like typos) > may be merged more quickly, if the commit message is appropriate, as > it could be done directly through GitHub. > > [1] > http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/Closing-automatically-inactive-pull-requests-tt22248.html > [2] > http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/DISCUSS-GitBox-td18027.html > [3] https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
+1 > On 16 May 2018, at 14:24, Aljoscha Krettek <aljos...@apache.org> wrote: > > +1 > > On Beam, we gradually enabled this, first for the website repo and then for > the main repo and we didn't run into problems. > >> On 16. May 2018, at 12:45, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> Forget an important feature: It would allow committers to close pull >> requests. >> >> On 16.05.2018 12:40, Chesnay Schepler wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> during the discussion about how to better manage pull requests [1] the >>> topic of GitBox integration came up again. >>> >>> This seems like a good opportunity to restart this discussion that we had >>> about a year ago [2]. >>> >>> * What is GitBox >>> >>> Essentially, GitBox allow us to use GitHub features. >>> We can decide for ourselves which features we want enabled. >>> >>> We could merge PRs directly on GitHub at the button of a click. >>> That said the merge functionality is fairly limited and would >>> require picture-perfect commits in the pull requests. >>> Commits can be squashed, but you cannot amend commits in any way, be >>> it fixing typos or changing the commit message. Realistically this >>> limits how much we can use this feature, and it may lead to a >>> decline in the quality of commit messages. >>> >>> Labels can be useful for the management of PRs as (ready for review, >>> delayed for next release, waiting for changes). This is really what >>> I'm personally most interested in. >>> >>> We've been using GitBox for flink-shaded for a while now and i >>> didn't run into any issue. AFAIK GitBox is also the default for new >>> projects. >>> >>> * What this means for committers: >>> >>> The apache git remote URL will change, which will require all >>> committers to update their git setup. >>> This also implies that we may have to update the website build scripts. >>> The new URL would (probably) be >>> /https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/flink.git/. >>> >>> To make use of GitHub features you have to link your GitHub and >>> Apache accounts. [3] >>> This also requires setting up two-factor authentication on GitHub. >>> >>> Update the scm entry in the parent pom.xml. >>> >>> * What this means for contributors: >>> >>> Nothing should change for contributors. Small changes (like typos) >>> may be merged more quickly, if the commit message is appropriate, as >>> it could be done directly through GitHub. >>> >>> [1] >>> http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/Closing-automatically-inactive-pull-requests-tt22248.html >>> [2] >>> http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/DISCUSS-GitBox-td18027.html >>> [3] https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/ >>> >> >
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
+1 On Beam, we gradually enabled this, first for the website repo and then for the main repo and we didn't run into problems. > On 16. May 2018, at 12:45, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: > > Forget an important feature: It would allow committers to close pull requests. > > On 16.05.2018 12:40, Chesnay Schepler wrote: >> Hello, >> >> during the discussion about how to better manage pull requests [1] the topic >> of GitBox integration came up again. >> >> This seems like a good opportunity to restart this discussion that we had >> about a year ago [2]. >> >> * What is GitBox >> >> Essentially, GitBox allow us to use GitHub features. >> We can decide for ourselves which features we want enabled. >> >> We could merge PRs directly on GitHub at the button of a click. >> That said the merge functionality is fairly limited and would >> require picture-perfect commits in the pull requests. >> Commits can be squashed, but you cannot amend commits in any way, be >> it fixing typos or changing the commit message. Realistically this >> limits how much we can use this feature, and it may lead to a >> decline in the quality of commit messages. >> >> Labels can be useful for the management of PRs as (ready for review, >> delayed for next release, waiting for changes). This is really what >> I'm personally most interested in. >> >> We've been using GitBox for flink-shaded for a while now and i >> didn't run into any issue. AFAIK GitBox is also the default for new >> projects. >> >> * What this means for committers: >> >> The apache git remote URL will change, which will require all >> committers to update their git setup. >> This also implies that we may have to update the website build scripts. >> The new URL would (probably) be >> /https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/flink.git/. >> >> To make use of GitHub features you have to link your GitHub and >> Apache accounts. [3] >> This also requires setting up two-factor authentication on GitHub. >> >> Update the scm entry in the parent pom.xml. >> >> * What this means for contributors: >> >> Nothing should change for contributors. Small changes (like typos) >> may be merged more quickly, if the commit message is appropriate, as >> it could be done directly through GitHub. >> >> [1] >> http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/Closing-automatically-inactive-pull-requests-tt22248.html >> [2] >> http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/DISCUSS-GitBox-td18027.html >> [3] https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/ >> >
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
Forget an important feature: It would allow committers to close pull requests. On 16.05.2018 12:40, Chesnay Schepler wrote: Hello, during the discussion about how to better manage pull requests [1] the topic of GitBox integration came up again. This seems like a good opportunity to restart this discussion that we had about a year ago [2]. * What is GitBox Essentially, GitBox allow us to use GitHub features. We can decide for ourselves which features we want enabled. We could merge PRs directly on GitHub at the button of a click. That said the merge functionality is fairly limited and would require picture-perfect commits in the pull requests. Commits can be squashed, but you cannot amend commits in any way, be it fixing typos or changing the commit message. Realistically this limits how much we can use this feature, and it may lead to a decline in the quality of commit messages. Labels can be useful for the management of PRs as (ready for review, delayed for next release, waiting for changes). This is really what I'm personally most interested in. We've been using GitBox for flink-shaded for a while now and i didn't run into any issue. AFAIK GitBox is also the default for new projects. * What this means for committers: The apache git remote URL will change, which will require all committers to update their git setup. This also implies that we may have to update the website build scripts. The new URL would (probably) be /https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/flink.git/. To make use of GitHub features you have to link your GitHub and Apache accounts. [3] This also requires setting up two-factor authentication on GitHub. Update the scm entry in the parent pom.xml. * What this means for contributors: Nothing should change for contributors. Small changes (like typos) may be merged more quickly, if the commit message is appropriate, as it could be done directly through GitHub. [1] http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/Closing-automatically-inactive-pull-requests-tt22248.html [2] http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/DISCUSS-GitBox-td18027.html [3] https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/
[DISCUSS] GitBox
Hello, during the discussion about how to better manage pull requests [1] the topic of GitBox integration came up again. This seems like a good opportunity to restart this discussion that we had about a year ago [2]. * What is GitBox Essentially, GitBox allow us to use GitHub features. We can decide for ourselves which features we want enabled. We could merge PRs directly on GitHub at the button of a click. That said the merge functionality is fairly limited and would require picture-perfect commits in the pull requests. Commits can be squashed, but you cannot amend commits in any way, be it fixing typos or changing the commit message. Realistically this limits how much we can use this feature, and it may lead to a decline in the quality of commit messages. Labels can be useful for the management of PRs as (ready for review, delayed for next release, waiting for changes). This is really what I'm personally most interested in. We've been using GitBox for flink-shaded for a while now and i didn't run into any issue. AFAIK GitBox is also the default for new projects. * What this means for committers: The apache git remote URL will change, which will require all committers to update their git setup. This also implies that we may have to update the website build scripts. The new URL would (probably) be /https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/flink.git/. To make use of GitHub features you have to link your GitHub and Apache accounts. [3] This also requires setting up two-factor authentication on GitHub. Update the scm entry in the parent pom.xml. * What this means for contributors: Nothing should change for contributors. Small changes (like typos) may be merged more quickly, if the commit message is appropriate, as it could be done directly through GitHub. [1] http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/Closing-automatically-inactive-pull-requests-tt22248.html [2] http://apache-flink-mailing-list-archive.1008284.n3.nabble.com/DISCUSS-GitBox-td18027.html [3] https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
It appears the mirroring is bi-directional. Here's the output i got while pushing /remote: Sending notification emails to: ['"comm...@flink.apache.org" <comm...@flink.apache.org>'] remote: To git@github:apache/flink-shaded.git remote:fd3033b..301c6bb 301c6bbc5e87c44eac48d43e3b9ce44f3b54b3eb -> test_branch remote: Syncing refs/heads/test_branch... To https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/flink-shaded.git fd3033b..301c6bb master -> test_branch / What remains to be seen is what happens if the 2 repos are out of sync, for example due to a concurrent push to both apache and github. I don't have the time today to try this out though. On 18.07.2017 16:48, Suneel Marthi wrote: FWIW, the Apache OpenNLP project recently moved to gitbox and even had a release following that - if anything it makes a committers' PR merge workflow lot easier when having to rebase, squash and merge PRs. See the section about 'Merging a PR via Github' here - http://opennlp.apache.org/using-git.html On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 10:36 AM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: Well then, let's just try it out :) I'll push a branch to the apache repo. On 18.07.2017 16:16, Greg Hogan wrote: My understanding was that the synchronization was bidirectional but clearly we’re working without documentation. http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble.com/PROPOSAL-Apache- Karaf-Slack-amp-discuss-about-GitBox-td4050669.html < http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble.com/PROPOSAL-Apache-Karaf- Slack-amp-discuss-about-GitBox-td4050669.html> http://apache-accumulo.1065345.n5.nabble.com/DISCUSS-GitBox-td21160.html <http://apache-accumulo.1065345.n5.nabble.com/DISCUSS-GitBox-td21160.html On Jul 18, 2017, at 8:45 AM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: According to the JIRA you linked, you can push the the apache repo, but it will be overridden by GitHub. (as it should since the GitHub repo is the original) The solution offered in the JIRA is to (force) push to the github repo instead of the apache one. Unless I'm misunderstanding this doesn't appear to change anything. On 18.07.2017 14:37, Greg Hogan wrote: You are not able to push to the ASF repo? This link implies that both work (and identify an issue now addressed): https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14039 < https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14039> From my .git/config: [remote "origin"] url = g...@github.com:apache/flink-shaded.git fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/* [remote "apache"] url = https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/flink-shaded.git fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/apache/* [branch "master"] remote = origin merge = refs/heads/master On Jul 18, 2017, at 7:52 AM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: So committers would still need to link their accounts. Source for the mirror info: https://issues.apache.org/jira /browse/INFRA-13926 On 18.07.2017 13:50, Chesnay Schepler wrote: Alright, so there is an apache repo that can found at https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=flink-shaded.git but it is a mirror of the github repo. For flink, we push to apache and it is mirrored to github. For flink-shaded, we push to github and it is mirror to apache. On 18.07.2017 13:47, Chesnay Schepler wrote: I'm not aware of any asf hosted repository for gitbox projects; if you look at the flink-shaded repository you will not see any mention of it being a mirror, compared to the flink repo. The git-wip-us.apache.org repo for flink-shaded was removed when we switched. On 18.07.2017 13:27, Greg Hogan wrote: Linking is required to commit to the ASF hosted repo as well as the GitHub repo? My understanding was that linking and 2FA was only required to commit through GitHub, so no one would have diminished capabilities. I’d generally recommend only ever writing to a single repo to prevent concurrent commits. On Jul 18, 2017, at 6:21 AM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: We recently moved flink-shaded to GitBox; overall I'm quite happy with how it works. However, it is not possible for committers to push commits that haven't gone through the github/asf account linking process (https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/). I verified this today in an experiment with the help of Robert. The linking process requires every committer to join the ASF github organization, include their github username in the apache profile, and setup 2-factor-authorization for their github account. While i would love to have the gitbox functionality for the Flink repository I don't know whether we want to impose these requirements on all committers. On 21.06.2017 19:49, Robert Metzger wrote: +1 for trying out Gitbox! On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 6:50 PM, Greg Hogan <c...@greghogan.com> wrote: My understanding is that with GitBox project committers who have linked Apache and G
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
FWIW, the Apache OpenNLP project recently moved to gitbox and even had a release following that - if anything it makes a committers' PR merge workflow lot easier when having to rebase, squash and merge PRs. See the section about 'Merging a PR via Github' here - http://opennlp.apache.org/using-git.html On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 10:36 AM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: > Well then, let's just try it out :) > > I'll push a branch to the apache repo. > > > On 18.07.2017 16:16, Greg Hogan wrote: > >> My understanding was that the synchronization was bidirectional but >> clearly we’re working without documentation. >> http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble.com/PROPOSAL-Apache- >> Karaf-Slack-amp-discuss-about-GitBox-td4050669.html < >> http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble.com/PROPOSAL-Apache-Karaf- >> Slack-amp-discuss-about-GitBox-td4050669.html> >> http://apache-accumulo.1065345.n5.nabble.com/DISCUSS-GitBox-td21160.html >> <http://apache-accumulo.1065345.n5.nabble.com/DISCUSS-GitBox-td21160.html >> > >> >> >> On Jul 18, 2017, at 8:45 AM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>> According to the JIRA you linked, you can push the the apache repo, but >>> it will be overridden by GitHub. >>> (as it should since the GitHub repo is the original) >>> >>> The solution offered in the JIRA is to (force) push to the github repo >>> instead of the apache one. >>> Unless I'm misunderstanding this doesn't appear to change anything. >>> >>> On 18.07.2017 14:37, Greg Hogan wrote: >>> >>>> You are not able to push to the ASF repo? This link implies that both >>>> work (and identify an issue now addressed): >>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14039 < >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14039> >>>> >>>> From my .git/config: >>>> >>>> [remote "origin"] >>>> url = g...@github.com:apache/flink-shaded.git >>>> fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/* >>>> [remote "apache"] >>>> url = https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/flink-shaded.git >>>> fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/apache/* >>>> [branch "master"] >>>> remote = origin >>>> merge = refs/heads/master >>>> >>>> >>>> On Jul 18, 2017, at 7:52 AM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> So committers would still need to link their accounts. >>>>> >>>>> Source for the mirror info: https://issues.apache.org/jira >>>>> /browse/INFRA-13926 >>>>> >>>>> On 18.07.2017 13:50, Chesnay Schepler wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Alright, so there is an apache repo that can found at >>>>>> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=flink-shaded.git >>>>>> but it is a mirror of the github repo. >>>>>> >>>>>> For flink, we push to apache and it is mirrored to github. >>>>>> For flink-shaded, we push to github and it is mirror to apache. >>>>>> >>>>>> On 18.07.2017 13:47, Chesnay Schepler wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm not aware of any asf hosted repository for gitbox projects; if >>>>>>> you look at the flink-shaded repository you will >>>>>>> not see any mention of it being a mirror, compared to the flink repo. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The git-wip-us.apache.org repo for flink-shaded was removed when we >>>>>>> switched. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 18.07.2017 13:27, Greg Hogan wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Linking is required to commit to the ASF hosted repo as well as the >>>>>>>> GitHub repo? My understanding was that linking and 2FA was only >>>>>>>> required to >>>>>>>> commit through GitHub, so no one would have diminished capabilities. >>>>>>>> I’d >>>>>>>> generally recommend only ever writing to a single repo to prevent >>>>>>>> concurrent commits. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Jul 18, 2017, at 6:21 AM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
Well then, let's just try it out :) I'll push a branch to the apache repo. On 18.07.2017 16:16, Greg Hogan wrote: My understanding was that the synchronization was bidirectional but clearly we’re working without documentation. http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble.com/PROPOSAL-Apache-Karaf-Slack-amp-discuss-about-GitBox-td4050669.html <http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble.com/PROPOSAL-Apache-Karaf-Slack-amp-discuss-about-GitBox-td4050669.html> http://apache-accumulo.1065345.n5.nabble.com/DISCUSS-GitBox-td21160.html <http://apache-accumulo.1065345.n5.nabble.com/DISCUSS-GitBox-td21160.html> On Jul 18, 2017, at 8:45 AM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: According to the JIRA you linked, you can push the the apache repo, but it will be overridden by GitHub. (as it should since the GitHub repo is the original) The solution offered in the JIRA is to (force) push to the github repo instead of the apache one. Unless I'm misunderstanding this doesn't appear to change anything. On 18.07.2017 14:37, Greg Hogan wrote: You are not able to push to the ASF repo? This link implies that both work (and identify an issue now addressed): https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14039 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14039> From my .git/config: [remote "origin"] url = g...@github.com:apache/flink-shaded.git fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/* [remote "apache"] url = https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/flink-shaded.git fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/apache/* [branch "master"] remote = origin merge = refs/heads/master On Jul 18, 2017, at 7:52 AM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: So committers would still need to link their accounts. Source for the mirror info: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-13926 On 18.07.2017 13:50, Chesnay Schepler wrote: Alright, so there is an apache repo that can found at https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=flink-shaded.git but it is a mirror of the github repo. For flink, we push to apache and it is mirrored to github. For flink-shaded, we push to github and it is mirror to apache. On 18.07.2017 13:47, Chesnay Schepler wrote: I'm not aware of any asf hosted repository for gitbox projects; if you look at the flink-shaded repository you will not see any mention of it being a mirror, compared to the flink repo. The git-wip-us.apache.org repo for flink-shaded was removed when we switched. On 18.07.2017 13:27, Greg Hogan wrote: Linking is required to commit to the ASF hosted repo as well as the GitHub repo? My understanding was that linking and 2FA was only required to commit through GitHub, so no one would have diminished capabilities. I’d generally recommend only ever writing to a single repo to prevent concurrent commits. On Jul 18, 2017, at 6:21 AM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: We recently moved flink-shaded to GitBox; overall I'm quite happy with how it works. However, it is not possible for committers to push commits that haven't gone through the github/asf account linking process (https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/). I verified this today in an experiment with the help of Robert. The linking process requires every committer to join the ASF github organization, include their github username in the apache profile, and setup 2-factor-authorization for their github account. While i would love to have the gitbox functionality for the Flink repository I don't know whether we want to impose these requirements on all committers. On 21.06.2017 19:49, Robert Metzger wrote: +1 for trying out Gitbox! On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 6:50 PM, Greg Hogan <c...@greghogan.com> wrote: My understanding is that with GitBox project committers who have linked Apache and GitHub accounts are given organization write permissions. Other contributors will continue to have read permissions. https://help.github.com/articles/repository-permission-levels-for-an- organization/ The last comment noting the “split-brain” shouldn’t preclude the use of GitBox but we should come to a general consensus before switching to commit into the GitHub repo. If we want to try GitHub for flink-web, a second step could to switch and use with the nascent flink-libraries. On Jun 18, 2017, at 6:50 AM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: Found some info in this JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/ jira/browse/INFRA-14191 Apparently, Gitbox is still in the beta phase. There are no public docs for it yet. Committers are required to link their apache & GitHub accounts, which requires 2FA on GitHub. As it stands I would be in favor of Gregs original suggestion of activating it for flink-web as a test bed. I would wait with the main repo until we actually have more info and it is a bit more proven. On 11.06.2017 19:37, Ufuk Celebi wrote: I would also like to see this happening for bo
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
My understanding was that the synchronization was bidirectional but clearly we’re working without documentation. http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble.com/PROPOSAL-Apache-Karaf-Slack-amp-discuss-about-GitBox-td4050669.html <http://karaf.922171.n3.nabble.com/PROPOSAL-Apache-Karaf-Slack-amp-discuss-about-GitBox-td4050669.html> http://apache-accumulo.1065345.n5.nabble.com/DISCUSS-GitBox-td21160.html <http://apache-accumulo.1065345.n5.nabble.com/DISCUSS-GitBox-td21160.html> > On Jul 18, 2017, at 8:45 AM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: > > According to the JIRA you linked, you can push the the apache repo, but it > will be overridden by GitHub. > (as it should since the GitHub repo is the original) > > The solution offered in the JIRA is to (force) push to the github repo > instead of the apache one. > Unless I'm misunderstanding this doesn't appear to change anything. > > On 18.07.2017 14:37, Greg Hogan wrote: >> You are not able to push to the ASF repo? This link implies that both work >> (and identify an issue now addressed): >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14039 >> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14039> >> >> From my .git/config: >> >> [remote "origin"] >> url = g...@github.com:apache/flink-shaded.git >> fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/* >> [remote "apache"] >> url = https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/flink-shaded.git >> fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/apache/* >> [branch "master"] >> remote = origin >> merge = refs/heads/master >> >> >>> On Jul 18, 2017, at 7:52 AM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>> So committers would still need to link their accounts. >>> >>> Source for the mirror info: >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-13926 >>> >>> On 18.07.2017 13:50, Chesnay Schepler wrote: >>>> Alright, so there is an apache repo that can found at >>>> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=flink-shaded.git >>>> but it is a mirror of the github repo. >>>> >>>> For flink, we push to apache and it is mirrored to github. >>>> For flink-shaded, we push to github and it is mirror to apache. >>>> >>>> On 18.07.2017 13:47, Chesnay Schepler wrote: >>>>> I'm not aware of any asf hosted repository for gitbox projects; if you >>>>> look at the flink-shaded repository you will >>>>> not see any mention of it being a mirror, compared to the flink repo. >>>>> >>>>> The git-wip-us.apache.org repo for flink-shaded was removed when we >>>>> switched. >>>>> >>>>> On 18.07.2017 13:27, Greg Hogan wrote: >>>>>> Linking is required to commit to the ASF hosted repo as well as the >>>>>> GitHub repo? My understanding was that linking and 2FA was only required >>>>>> to commit through GitHub, so no one would have diminished capabilities. >>>>>> I’d generally recommend only ever writing to a single repo to prevent >>>>>> concurrent commits. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Jul 18, 2017, at 6:21 AM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We recently moved flink-shaded to GitBox; overall I'm quite happy with >>>>>>> how it works. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> However, it is not possible for committers to push commits that haven't >>>>>>> gone through the github/asf >>>>>>> account linking process (https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I verified this today in an experiment with the help of Robert. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The linking process requires every committer to join the ASF github >>>>>>> organization, include their github username >>>>>>> in the apache profile, and setup 2-factor-authorization for their >>>>>>> github account. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> While i would love to have the gitbox functionality for the Flink >>>>>>> repository I don't know whether we want to >>>>>>> impose these requirements on all committers. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 21.06.2017 19:49, Robert Metzger wrote: >>>&g
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
hat migration looks to be satisfactory. On Jun 9, 2017, at 11:15 AM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: bq. better track the oft-neglected contributions Do you have estimate on how many contributions were not paid attention in the current infrastructure. Looking at #2, it seems Accumulo community hasn't reached consensus yet. Cheers On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 7:54 AM, Greg Hogan <c...@greghogan.com> wrote: All, ASF now has available (and maybe mandatory for new projects or repos) GitBox [0] which enables bi-directional sync to GitHub and links committers' accounts, allowing for greater use of GitHub functionality by contributors and for committers to perform many tasks otherwise requiring INFRA tickets. I'd like to propose moving flink-web [1] to GitBox, using GitHub issues, and enabling notifications to the mailing lists. Apache Accumulo has recently discussed [2] this topic with a list of benefits after migrating Fluo. By migrating flink-web we can better track the oft-neglected contributions and also test the waters for future migrations (perhaps for the future sub-projects). [0] https://gitbox.apache.org/ [1] https://github.com/apache/flink-web/pulls [2] http://apache-accumulo.1065345.n5.nabble.com/DISCUSS- GitBox-tp21160p21497.html Greg
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
the beta phase. There are no public docs >>>>>>> for it yet. >>>>>>>> Committers are required to link their apache & GitHub accounts, which >>>>>>> requires 2FA on GitHub. >>>>>>>> As it stands I would be in favor of Gregs original suggestion of >>>>>>> activating it for flink-web as a test bed. >>>>>>>> I would wait with the main repo until we actually have more info and it >>>>>>> is a bit more proven. >>>>>>>> On 11.06.2017 19:37, Ufuk Celebi wrote: >>>>>>>>> I would also like to see this happening for both flink-web and flink >>>>>>>>> if it allows committers to have control over the respective repos. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 4:05 PM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> What are the downsides of this? Actually, is there any ASF resource >>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>> outlines what this would enable? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> In one of the threads i saw said that this would also allow >>>>>>>>>> committers >>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>> close PR's, assign labels and such. >>>>>>>>>> This sounds very interesting to me for the main repo actually. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 09.06.2017 17:41, Greg Hogan wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> Robert has an open PR from March. I’ve found, for example, PRs >>>>>>>>>>> adding >>>>>>>>>>> links to talks or slides left open for months. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I’d suggest Fluo is to Accumulo as flink-web is to the flink repo, >>>>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>>> that migration looks to be satisfactory. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 9, 2017, at 11:15 AM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> bq. better track the oft-neglected contributions >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Do you have estimate on how many contributions were not paid >>>>>>> attention in >>>>>>>>>>>> the current infrastructure. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Looking at #2, it seems Accumulo community hasn't reached consensus >>>>>>> yet. >>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 7:54 AM, Greg Hogan <c...@greghogan.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> All, >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ASF now has available (and maybe mandatory for new projects or >>>>>>> repos) >>>>>>>>>>>>> GitBox [0] which enables bi-directional sync to GitHub and links >>>>>>>>>>>>> committers' accounts, allowing for greater use of GitHub >>>>>>> functionality >>>>>>>>>>>>> by >>>>>>>>>>>>> contributors and for committers to perform many tasks otherwise >>>>>>>>>>>>> requiring >>>>>>>>>>>>> INFRA tickets. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to propose moving flink-web [1] to GitBox, using GitHub >>>>>>> issues, >>>>>>>>>>>>> and enabling notifications to the mailing lists. Apache Accumulo >>>>>>>>>>>>> has >>>>>>>>>>>>> recently discussed [2] this topic with a list of benefits after >>>>>>>>>>>>> migrating >>>>>>>>>>>>> Fluo. By migrating flink-web we can better track the oft-neglected >>>>>>>>>>>>> contributions and also test the waters for future migrations >>>>>>> (perhaps >>>>>>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>>>>>> the future sub-projects). >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> [0] https://gitbox.apache.org/ >>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/flink-web/pulls >>>>>>>>>>>>> [2] >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://apache-accumulo.1065345.n5.nabble.com/DISCUSS- >>>>>>>>>>>>> GitBox-tp21160p21497.html >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Greg >>>> >>> >> >> >
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
ions and also test the waters for future migrations (perhaps for the future sub-projects). [0] https://gitbox.apache.org/ [1] https://github.com/apache/flink-web/pulls [2] http://apache-accumulo.1065345.n5.nabble.com/DISCUSS- GitBox-tp21160p21497.html Greg
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
Alright, so there is an apache repo that can found at https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=flink-shaded.git but it is a mirror of the github repo. For flink, we push to apache and it is mirrored to github. For flink-shaded, we push to github and it is mirror to apache. On 18.07.2017 13:47, Chesnay Schepler wrote: I'm not aware of any asf hosted repository for gitbox projects; if you look at the flink-shaded repository you will not see any mention of it being a mirror, compared to the flink repo. The git-wip-us.apache.org repo for flink-shaded was removed when we switched. On 18.07.2017 13:27, Greg Hogan wrote: Linking is required to commit to the ASF hosted repo as well as the GitHub repo? My understanding was that linking and 2FA was only required to commit through GitHub, so no one would have diminished capabilities. I’d generally recommend only ever writing to a single repo to prevent concurrent commits. On Jul 18, 2017, at 6:21 AM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: We recently moved flink-shaded to GitBox; overall I'm quite happy with how it works. However, it is not possible for committers to push commits that haven't gone through the github/asf account linking process (https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/). I verified this today in an experiment with the help of Robert. The linking process requires every committer to join the ASF github organization, include their github username in the apache profile, and setup 2-factor-authorization for their github account. While i would love to have the gitbox functionality for the Flink repository I don't know whether we want to impose these requirements on all committers. On 21.06.2017 19:49, Robert Metzger wrote: +1 for trying out Gitbox! On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 6:50 PM, Greg Hogan <c...@greghogan.com> wrote: My understanding is that with GitBox project committers who have linked Apache and GitHub accounts are given organization write permissions. Other contributors will continue to have read permissions. https://help.github.com/articles/repository-permission-levels-for-an- organization/ The last comment noting the “split-brain” shouldn’t preclude the use of GitBox but we should come to a general consensus before switching to commit into the GitHub repo. If we want to try GitHub for flink-web, a second step could to switch and use with the nascent flink-libraries. On Jun 18, 2017, at 6:50 AM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: Found some info in this JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/ jira/browse/INFRA-14191 Apparently, Gitbox is still in the beta phase. There are no public docs for it yet. Committers are required to link their apache & GitHub accounts, which requires 2FA on GitHub. As it stands I would be in favor of Gregs original suggestion of activating it for flink-web as a test bed. I would wait with the main repo until we actually have more info and it is a bit more proven. On 11.06.2017 19:37, Ufuk Celebi wrote: I would also like to see this happening for both flink-web and flink if it allows committers to have control over the respective repos. On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 4:05 PM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: What are the downsides of this? Actually, is there any ASF resource that outlines what this would enable? In one of the threads i saw said that this would also allow committers to close PR's, assign labels and such. This sounds very interesting to me for the main repo actually. On 09.06.2017 17:41, Greg Hogan wrote: Robert has an open PR from March. I’ve found, for example, PRs adding links to talks or slides left open for months. I’d suggest Fluo is to Accumulo as flink-web is to the flink repo, and that migration looks to be satisfactory. On Jun 9, 2017, at 11:15 AM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: bq. better track the oft-neglected contributions Do you have estimate on how many contributions were not paid attention in the current infrastructure. Looking at #2, it seems Accumulo community hasn't reached consensus yet. Cheers On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 7:54 AM, Greg Hogan <c...@greghogan.com> wrote: All, ASF now has available (and maybe mandatory for new projects or repos) GitBox [0] which enables bi-directional sync to GitHub and links committers' accounts, allowing for greater use of GitHub functionality by contributors and for committers to perform many tasks otherwise requiring INFRA tickets. I'd like to propose moving flink-web [1] to GitBox, using GitHub issues, and enabling notifications to the mailing lists. Apache Accumulo has recently discussed [2] this topic with a list of benefits after migrating Fluo. By migrating flink-web we can better track the oft-neglected contributions and also test the waters for future migrations (perhaps for the future sub-projects). [0] https://gitbox.apache.org/ [1] https://github.com/apache/flink-web/pulls [2] http://apach
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
I'm not aware of any asf hosted repository for gitbox projects; if you look at the flink-shaded repository you will not see any mention of it being a mirror, compared to the flink repo. The git-wip-us.apache.org repo for flink-shaded was removed when we switched. On 18.07.2017 13:27, Greg Hogan wrote: Linking is required to commit to the ASF hosted repo as well as the GitHub repo? My understanding was that linking and 2FA was only required to commit through GitHub, so no one would have diminished capabilities. I’d generally recommend only ever writing to a single repo to prevent concurrent commits. On Jul 18, 2017, at 6:21 AM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: We recently moved flink-shaded to GitBox; overall I'm quite happy with how it works. However, it is not possible for committers to push commits that haven't gone through the github/asf account linking process (https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/). I verified this today in an experiment with the help of Robert. The linking process requires every committer to join the ASF github organization, include their github username in the apache profile, and setup 2-factor-authorization for their github account. While i would love to have the gitbox functionality for the Flink repository I don't know whether we want to impose these requirements on all committers. On 21.06.2017 19:49, Robert Metzger wrote: +1 for trying out Gitbox! On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 6:50 PM, Greg Hogan <c...@greghogan.com> wrote: My understanding is that with GitBox project committers who have linked Apache and GitHub accounts are given organization write permissions. Other contributors will continue to have read permissions. https://help.github.com/articles/repository-permission-levels-for-an- organization/ The last comment noting the “split-brain” shouldn’t preclude the use of GitBox but we should come to a general consensus before switching to commit into the GitHub repo. If we want to try GitHub for flink-web, a second step could to switch and use with the nascent flink-libraries. On Jun 18, 2017, at 6:50 AM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: Found some info in this JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/ jira/browse/INFRA-14191 Apparently, Gitbox is still in the beta phase. There are no public docs for it yet. Committers are required to link their apache & GitHub accounts, which requires 2FA on GitHub. As it stands I would be in favor of Gregs original suggestion of activating it for flink-web as a test bed. I would wait with the main repo until we actually have more info and it is a bit more proven. On 11.06.2017 19:37, Ufuk Celebi wrote: I would also like to see this happening for both flink-web and flink if it allows committers to have control over the respective repos. On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 4:05 PM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: What are the downsides of this? Actually, is there any ASF resource that outlines what this would enable? In one of the threads i saw said that this would also allow committers to close PR's, assign labels and such. This sounds very interesting to me for the main repo actually. On 09.06.2017 17:41, Greg Hogan wrote: Robert has an open PR from March. I’ve found, for example, PRs adding links to talks or slides left open for months. I’d suggest Fluo is to Accumulo as flink-web is to the flink repo, and that migration looks to be satisfactory. On Jun 9, 2017, at 11:15 AM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: bq. better track the oft-neglected contributions Do you have estimate on how many contributions were not paid attention in the current infrastructure. Looking at #2, it seems Accumulo community hasn't reached consensus yet. Cheers On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 7:54 AM, Greg Hogan <c...@greghogan.com> wrote: All, ASF now has available (and maybe mandatory for new projects or repos) GitBox [0] which enables bi-directional sync to GitHub and links committers' accounts, allowing for greater use of GitHub functionality by contributors and for committers to perform many tasks otherwise requiring INFRA tickets. I'd like to propose moving flink-web [1] to GitBox, using GitHub issues, and enabling notifications to the mailing lists. Apache Accumulo has recently discussed [2] this topic with a list of benefits after migrating Fluo. By migrating flink-web we can better track the oft-neglected contributions and also test the waters for future migrations (perhaps for the future sub-projects). [0] https://gitbox.apache.org/ [1] https://github.com/apache/flink-web/pulls [2] http://apache-accumulo.1065345.n5.nabble.com/DISCUSS- GitBox-tp21160p21497.html Greg
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
Linking is required to commit to the ASF hosted repo as well as the GitHub repo? My understanding was that linking and 2FA was only required to commit through GitHub, so no one would have diminished capabilities. I’d generally recommend only ever writing to a single repo to prevent concurrent commits. > On Jul 18, 2017, at 6:21 AM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: > > We recently moved flink-shaded to GitBox; overall I'm quite happy with how it > works. > > However, it is not possible for committers to push commits that haven't gone > through the github/asf > account linking process (https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/). > > I verified this today in an experiment with the help of Robert. > > The linking process requires every committer to join the ASF github > organization, include their github username > in the apache profile, and setup 2-factor-authorization for their github > account. > > While i would love to have the gitbox functionality for the Flink repository > I don't know whether we want to > impose these requirements on all committers. > > On 21.06.2017 19:49, Robert Metzger wrote: >> +1 for trying out Gitbox! >> >> On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 6:50 PM, Greg Hogan <c...@greghogan.com> wrote: >> >>> My understanding is that with GitBox project committers who have linked >>> Apache and GitHub accounts are given organization write permissions. Other >>> contributors will continue to have read permissions. >>> https://help.github.com/articles/repository-permission-levels-for-an- >>> organization/ >>> >>> The last comment noting the “split-brain” shouldn’t preclude the use of >>> GitBox but we should come to a general consensus before switching to commit >>> into the GitHub repo. >>> >>> If we want to try GitHub for flink-web, a second step could to switch and >>> use with the nascent flink-libraries. >>> >>> >>>> On Jun 18, 2017, at 6:50 AM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> >>> wrote: >>>> Found some info in this JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/ >>> jira/browse/INFRA-14191 >>>> Apparently, Gitbox is still in the beta phase. There are no public docs >>> for it yet. >>>> Committers are required to link their apache & GitHub accounts, which >>> requires 2FA on GitHub. >>>> As it stands I would be in favor of Gregs original suggestion of >>> activating it for flink-web as a test bed. >>>> I would wait with the main repo until we actually have more info and it >>> is a bit more proven. >>>> On 11.06.2017 19:37, Ufuk Celebi wrote: >>>>> I would also like to see this happening for both flink-web and flink >>>>> if it allows committers to have control over the respective repos. >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 4:05 PM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> >>> wrote: >>>>>> What are the downsides of this? Actually, is there any ASF resource >>> that >>>>>> outlines what this would enable? >>>>>> >>>>>> In one of the threads i saw said that this would also allow committers >>> to >>>>>> close PR's, assign labels and such. >>>>>> This sounds very interesting to me for the main repo actually. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 09.06.2017 17:41, Greg Hogan wrote: >>>>>>> Robert has an open PR from March. I’ve found, for example, PRs adding >>>>>>> links to talks or slides left open for months. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I’d suggest Fluo is to Accumulo as flink-web is to the flink repo, and >>>>>>> that migration looks to be satisfactory. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Jun 9, 2017, at 11:15 AM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> bq. better track the oft-neglected contributions >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Do you have estimate on how many contributions were not paid >>> attention in >>>>>>>> the current infrastructure. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Looking at #2, it seems Accumulo community hasn't reached consensus >>> yet. >>>>>>>> Cheers >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 7:54 AM, Greg Hogan <c...@greghogan.com> >>&g
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
We recently moved flink-shaded to GitBox; overall I'm quite happy with how it works. However, it is not possible for committers to push commits that haven't gone through the github/asf account linking process (https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/). I verified this today in an experiment with the help of Robert. The linking process requires every committer to join the ASF github organization, include their github username in the apache profile, and setup 2-factor-authorization for their github account. While i would love to have the gitbox functionality for the Flink repository I don't know whether we want to impose these requirements on all committers. On 21.06.2017 19:49, Robert Metzger wrote: +1 for trying out Gitbox! On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 6:50 PM, Greg Hogan <c...@greghogan.com> wrote: My understanding is that with GitBox project committers who have linked Apache and GitHub accounts are given organization write permissions. Other contributors will continue to have read permissions. https://help.github.com/articles/repository-permission-levels-for-an- organization/ The last comment noting the “split-brain” shouldn’t preclude the use of GitBox but we should come to a general consensus before switching to commit into the GitHub repo. If we want to try GitHub for flink-web, a second step could to switch and use with the nascent flink-libraries. On Jun 18, 2017, at 6:50 AM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: Found some info in this JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/ jira/browse/INFRA-14191 Apparently, Gitbox is still in the beta phase. There are no public docs for it yet. Committers are required to link their apache & GitHub accounts, which requires 2FA on GitHub. As it stands I would be in favor of Gregs original suggestion of activating it for flink-web as a test bed. I would wait with the main repo until we actually have more info and it is a bit more proven. On 11.06.2017 19:37, Ufuk Celebi wrote: I would also like to see this happening for both flink-web and flink if it allows committers to have control over the respective repos. On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 4:05 PM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: What are the downsides of this? Actually, is there any ASF resource that outlines what this would enable? In one of the threads i saw said that this would also allow committers to close PR's, assign labels and such. This sounds very interesting to me for the main repo actually. On 09.06.2017 17:41, Greg Hogan wrote: Robert has an open PR from March. I’ve found, for example, PRs adding links to talks or slides left open for months. I’d suggest Fluo is to Accumulo as flink-web is to the flink repo, and that migration looks to be satisfactory. On Jun 9, 2017, at 11:15 AM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: bq. better track the oft-neglected contributions Do you have estimate on how many contributions were not paid attention in the current infrastructure. Looking at #2, it seems Accumulo community hasn't reached consensus yet. Cheers On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 7:54 AM, Greg Hogan <c...@greghogan.com> wrote: All, ASF now has available (and maybe mandatory for new projects or repos) GitBox [0] which enables bi-directional sync to GitHub and links committers' accounts, allowing for greater use of GitHub functionality by contributors and for committers to perform many tasks otherwise requiring INFRA tickets. I'd like to propose moving flink-web [1] to GitBox, using GitHub issues, and enabling notifications to the mailing lists. Apache Accumulo has recently discussed [2] this topic with a list of benefits after migrating Fluo. By migrating flink-web we can better track the oft-neglected contributions and also test the waters for future migrations (perhaps for the future sub-projects). [0] https://gitbox.apache.org/ [1] https://github.com/apache/flink-web/pulls [2] http://apache-accumulo.1065345.n5.nabble.com/DISCUSS- GitBox-tp21160p21497.html Greg
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
+1 for trying out Gitbox! On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 6:50 PM, Greg Hogan <c...@greghogan.com> wrote: > My understanding is that with GitBox project committers who have linked > Apache and GitHub accounts are given organization write permissions. Other > contributors will continue to have read permissions. > https://help.github.com/articles/repository-permission-levels-for-an- > organization/ > > The last comment noting the “split-brain” shouldn’t preclude the use of > GitBox but we should come to a general consensus before switching to commit > into the GitHub repo. > > If we want to try GitHub for flink-web, a second step could to switch and > use with the nascent flink-libraries. > > > > On Jun 18, 2017, at 6:50 AM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > Found some info in this JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/ > jira/browse/INFRA-14191 > > > > Apparently, Gitbox is still in the beta phase. There are no public docs > for it yet. > > > > Committers are required to link their apache & GitHub accounts, which > requires 2FA on GitHub. > > > > As it stands I would be in favor of Gregs original suggestion of > activating it for flink-web as a test bed. > > I would wait with the main repo until we actually have more info and it > is a bit more proven. > > > > On 11.06.2017 19:37, Ufuk Celebi wrote: > >> I would also like to see this happening for both flink-web and flink > >> if it allows committers to have control over the respective repos. > >> > >> On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 4:05 PM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> > wrote: > >>> What are the downsides of this? Actually, is there any ASF resource > that > >>> outlines what this would enable? > >>> > >>> In one of the threads i saw said that this would also allow committers > to > >>> close PR's, assign labels and such. > >>> This sounds very interesting to me for the main repo actually. > >>> > >>> > >>> On 09.06.2017 17:41, Greg Hogan wrote: > >>>> Robert has an open PR from March. I’ve found, for example, PRs adding > >>>> links to talks or slides left open for months. > >>>> > >>>> I’d suggest Fluo is to Accumulo as flink-web is to the flink repo, and > >>>> that migration looks to be satisfactory. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> On Jun 9, 2017, at 11:15 AM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> bq. better track the oft-neglected contributions > >>>>> > >>>>> Do you have estimate on how many contributions were not paid > attention in > >>>>> the current infrastructure. > >>>>> > >>>>> Looking at #2, it seems Accumulo community hasn't reached consensus > yet. > >>>>> > >>>>> Cheers > >>>>> > >>>>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 7:54 AM, Greg Hogan <c...@greghogan.com> > wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> All, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> ASF now has available (and maybe mandatory for new projects or > repos) > >>>>>> GitBox [0] which enables bi-directional sync to GitHub and links > >>>>>> committers' accounts, allowing for greater use of GitHub > functionality > >>>>>> by > >>>>>> contributors and for committers to perform many tasks otherwise > >>>>>> requiring > >>>>>> INFRA tickets. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I'd like to propose moving flink-web [1] to GitBox, using GitHub > issues, > >>>>>> and enabling notifications to the mailing lists. Apache Accumulo has > >>>>>> recently discussed [2] this topic with a list of benefits after > >>>>>> migrating > >>>>>> Fluo. By migrating flink-web we can better track the oft-neglected > >>>>>> contributions and also test the waters for future migrations > (perhaps > >>>>>> for > >>>>>> the future sub-projects). > >>>>>> > >>>>>> [0] https://gitbox.apache.org/ > >>>>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/flink-web/pulls > >>>>>> [2] > >>>>>> http://apache-accumulo.1065345.n5.nabble.com/DISCUSS- > >>>>>> GitBox-tp21160p21497.html > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Greg > >>> > >>> > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
My understanding is that with GitBox project committers who have linked Apache and GitHub accounts are given organization write permissions. Other contributors will continue to have read permissions. https://help.github.com/articles/repository-permission-levels-for-an-organization/ The last comment noting the “split-brain” shouldn’t preclude the use of GitBox but we should come to a general consensus before switching to commit into the GitHub repo. If we want to try GitHub for flink-web, a second step could to switch and use with the nascent flink-libraries. > On Jun 18, 2017, at 6:50 AM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: > > Found some info in this JIRA: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14191 > > Apparently, Gitbox is still in the beta phase. There are no public docs for > it yet. > > Committers are required to link their apache & GitHub accounts, which > requires 2FA on GitHub. > > As it stands I would be in favor of Gregs original suggestion of activating > it for flink-web as a test bed. > I would wait with the main repo until we actually have more info and it is a > bit more proven. > > On 11.06.2017 19:37, Ufuk Celebi wrote: >> I would also like to see this happening for both flink-web and flink >> if it allows committers to have control over the respective repos. >> >> On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 4:05 PM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: >>> What are the downsides of this? Actually, is there any ASF resource that >>> outlines what this would enable? >>> >>> In one of the threads i saw said that this would also allow committers to >>> close PR's, assign labels and such. >>> This sounds very interesting to me for the main repo actually. >>> >>> >>> On 09.06.2017 17:41, Greg Hogan wrote: >>>> Robert has an open PR from March. I’ve found, for example, PRs adding >>>> links to talks or slides left open for months. >>>> >>>> I’d suggest Fluo is to Accumulo as flink-web is to the flink repo, and >>>> that migration looks to be satisfactory. >>>> >>>> >>>>> On Jun 9, 2017, at 11:15 AM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> bq. better track the oft-neglected contributions >>>>> >>>>> Do you have estimate on how many contributions were not paid attention in >>>>> the current infrastructure. >>>>> >>>>> Looking at #2, it seems Accumulo community hasn't reached consensus yet. >>>>> >>>>> Cheers >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 7:54 AM, Greg Hogan <c...@greghogan.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> All, >>>>>> >>>>>> ASF now has available (and maybe mandatory for new projects or repos) >>>>>> GitBox [0] which enables bi-directional sync to GitHub and links >>>>>> committers' accounts, allowing for greater use of GitHub functionality >>>>>> by >>>>>> contributors and for committers to perform many tasks otherwise >>>>>> requiring >>>>>> INFRA tickets. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'd like to propose moving flink-web [1] to GitBox, using GitHub issues, >>>>>> and enabling notifications to the mailing lists. Apache Accumulo has >>>>>> recently discussed [2] this topic with a list of benefits after >>>>>> migrating >>>>>> Fluo. By migrating flink-web we can better track the oft-neglected >>>>>> contributions and also test the waters for future migrations (perhaps >>>>>> for >>>>>> the future sub-projects). >>>>>> >>>>>> [0] https://gitbox.apache.org/ >>>>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/flink-web/pulls >>>>>> [2] >>>>>> http://apache-accumulo.1065345.n5.nabble.com/DISCUSS- >>>>>> GitBox-tp21160p21497.html >>>>>> >>>>>> Greg >>> >>> >
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
Found some info in this JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14191 Apparently, Gitbox is still in the beta phase. There are no public docs for it yet. Committers are required to link their apache & GitHub accounts, which requires 2FA on GitHub. As it stands I would be in favor of Gregs original suggestion of activating it for flink-web as a test bed. I would wait with the main repo until we actually have more info and it is a bit more proven. On 11.06.2017 19:37, Ufuk Celebi wrote: I would also like to see this happening for both flink-web and flink if it allows committers to have control over the respective repos. On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 4:05 PM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: What are the downsides of this? Actually, is there any ASF resource that outlines what this would enable? In one of the threads i saw said that this would also allow committers to close PR's, assign labels and such. This sounds very interesting to me for the main repo actually. On 09.06.2017 17:41, Greg Hogan wrote: Robert has an open PR from March. I’ve found, for example, PRs adding links to talks or slides left open for months. I’d suggest Fluo is to Accumulo as flink-web is to the flink repo, and that migration looks to be satisfactory. On Jun 9, 2017, at 11:15 AM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: bq. better track the oft-neglected contributions Do you have estimate on how many contributions were not paid attention in the current infrastructure. Looking at #2, it seems Accumulo community hasn't reached consensus yet. Cheers On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 7:54 AM, Greg Hogan <c...@greghogan.com> wrote: All, ASF now has available (and maybe mandatory for new projects or repos) GitBox [0] which enables bi-directional sync to GitHub and links committers' accounts, allowing for greater use of GitHub functionality by contributors and for committers to perform many tasks otherwise requiring INFRA tickets. I'd like to propose moving flink-web [1] to GitBox, using GitHub issues, and enabling notifications to the mailing lists. Apache Accumulo has recently discussed [2] this topic with a list of benefits after migrating Fluo. By migrating flink-web we can better track the oft-neglected contributions and also test the waters for future migrations (perhaps for the future sub-projects). [0] https://gitbox.apache.org/ [1] https://github.com/apache/flink-web/pulls [2] http://apache-accumulo.1065345.n5.nabble.com/DISCUSS- GitBox-tp21160p21497.html Greg
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
I would also like to see this happening for both flink-web and flink if it allows committers to have control over the respective repos. On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 4:05 PM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: > What are the downsides of this? Actually, is there any ASF resource that > outlines what this would enable? > > In one of the threads i saw said that this would also allow committers to > close PR's, assign labels and such. > This sounds very interesting to me for the main repo actually. > > > On 09.06.2017 17:41, Greg Hogan wrote: >> >> Robert has an open PR from March. I’ve found, for example, PRs adding >> links to talks or slides left open for months. >> >> I’d suggest Fluo is to Accumulo as flink-web is to the flink repo, and >> that migration looks to be satisfactory. >> >> >>> On Jun 9, 2017, at 11:15 AM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> bq. better track the oft-neglected contributions >>> >>> Do you have estimate on how many contributions were not paid attention in >>> the current infrastructure. >>> >>> Looking at #2, it seems Accumulo community hasn't reached consensus yet. >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 7:54 AM, Greg Hogan <c...@greghogan.com> wrote: >>> >>>> All, >>>> >>>> ASF now has available (and maybe mandatory for new projects or repos) >>>> GitBox [0] which enables bi-directional sync to GitHub and links >>>> committers' accounts, allowing for greater use of GitHub functionality >>>> by >>>> contributors and for committers to perform many tasks otherwise >>>> requiring >>>> INFRA tickets. >>>> >>>> I'd like to propose moving flink-web [1] to GitBox, using GitHub issues, >>>> and enabling notifications to the mailing lists. Apache Accumulo has >>>> recently discussed [2] this topic with a list of benefits after >>>> migrating >>>> Fluo. By migrating flink-web we can better track the oft-neglected >>>> contributions and also test the waters for future migrations (perhaps >>>> for >>>> the future sub-projects). >>>> >>>> [0] https://gitbox.apache.org/ >>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/flink-web/pulls >>>> [2] >>>> http://apache-accumulo.1065345.n5.nabble.com/DISCUSS- >>>> GitBox-tp21160p21497.html >>>> >>>> Greg > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
What are the downsides of this? Actually, is there any ASF resource that outlines what this would enable? In one of the threads i saw said that this would also allow committers to close PR's, assign labels and such. This sounds very interesting to me for the main repo actually. On 09.06.2017 17:41, Greg Hogan wrote: Robert has an open PR from March. I’ve found, for example, PRs adding links to talks or slides left open for months. I’d suggest Fluo is to Accumulo as flink-web is to the flink repo, and that migration looks to be satisfactory. On Jun 9, 2017, at 11:15 AM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: bq. better track the oft-neglected contributions Do you have estimate on how many contributions were not paid attention in the current infrastructure. Looking at #2, it seems Accumulo community hasn't reached consensus yet. Cheers On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 7:54 AM, Greg Hogan <c...@greghogan.com> wrote: All, ASF now has available (and maybe mandatory for new projects or repos) GitBox [0] which enables bi-directional sync to GitHub and links committers' accounts, allowing for greater use of GitHub functionality by contributors and for committers to perform many tasks otherwise requiring INFRA tickets. I'd like to propose moving flink-web [1] to GitBox, using GitHub issues, and enabling notifications to the mailing lists. Apache Accumulo has recently discussed [2] this topic with a list of benefits after migrating Fluo. By migrating flink-web we can better track the oft-neglected contributions and also test the waters for future migrations (perhaps for the future sub-projects). [0] https://gitbox.apache.org/ [1] https://github.com/apache/flink-web/pulls [2] http://apache-accumulo.1065345.n5.nabble.com/DISCUSS- GitBox-tp21160p21497.html Greg
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
Robert has an open PR from March. I’ve found, for example, PRs adding links to talks or slides left open for months. I’d suggest Fluo is to Accumulo as flink-web is to the flink repo, and that migration looks to be satisfactory. > On Jun 9, 2017, at 11:15 AM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote: > > bq. better track the oft-neglected contributions > > Do you have estimate on how many contributions were not paid attention in > the current infrastructure. > > Looking at #2, it seems Accumulo community hasn't reached consensus yet. > > Cheers > > On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 7:54 AM, Greg Hogan <c...@greghogan.com> wrote: > >> All, >> >> ASF now has available (and maybe mandatory for new projects or repos) >> GitBox [0] which enables bi-directional sync to GitHub and links >> committers' accounts, allowing for greater use of GitHub functionality by >> contributors and for committers to perform many tasks otherwise requiring >> INFRA tickets. >> >> I'd like to propose moving flink-web [1] to GitBox, using GitHub issues, >> and enabling notifications to the mailing lists. Apache Accumulo has >> recently discussed [2] this topic with a list of benefits after migrating >> Fluo. By migrating flink-web we can better track the oft-neglected >> contributions and also test the waters for future migrations (perhaps for >> the future sub-projects). >> >> [0] https://gitbox.apache.org/ >> [1] https://github.com/apache/flink-web/pulls >> [2] >> http://apache-accumulo.1065345.n5.nabble.com/DISCUSS- >> GitBox-tp21160p21497.html >> >> Greg
Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
bq. better track the oft-neglected contributions Do you have estimate on how many contributions were not paid attention in the current infrastructure. Looking at #2, it seems Accumulo community hasn't reached consensus yet. Cheers On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 7:54 AM, Greg Hogan <c...@greghogan.com> wrote: > All, > > ASF now has available (and maybe mandatory for new projects or repos) > GitBox [0] which enables bi-directional sync to GitHub and links > committers' accounts, allowing for greater use of GitHub functionality by > contributors and for committers to perform many tasks otherwise requiring > INFRA tickets. > > I'd like to propose moving flink-web [1] to GitBox, using GitHub issues, > and enabling notifications to the mailing lists. Apache Accumulo has > recently discussed [2] this topic with a list of benefits after migrating > Fluo. By migrating flink-web we can better track the oft-neglected > contributions and also test the waters for future migrations (perhaps for > the future sub-projects). > > [0] https://gitbox.apache.org/ > [1] https://github.com/apache/flink-web/pulls > [2] > http://apache-accumulo.1065345.n5.nabble.com/DISCUSS- > GitBox-tp21160p21497.html > > Greg >
[DISCUSS] GitBox
All, ASF now has available (and maybe mandatory for new projects or repos) GitBox [0] which enables bi-directional sync to GitHub and links committers' accounts, allowing for greater use of GitHub functionality by contributors and for committers to perform many tasks otherwise requiring INFRA tickets. I'd like to propose moving flink-web [1] to GitBox, using GitHub issues, and enabling notifications to the mailing lists. Apache Accumulo has recently discussed [2] this topic with a list of benefits after migrating Fluo. By migrating flink-web we can better track the oft-neglected contributions and also test the waters for future migrations (perhaps for the future sub-projects). [0] https://gitbox.apache.org/ [1] https://github.com/apache/flink-web/pulls [2] http://apache-accumulo.1065345.n5.nabble.com/DISCUSS-GitBox-tp21160p21497.html Greg
