Re: Gitbox enables the full GitHub workflow

[Anthony Baker]

See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-15001 
.

Anthony

> On Aug 22, 2017, at 10:43 AM, Anthony Baker  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Aug 7, 2017, at 6:09 PM, Roman Shaposhnik  wrote:
>> 
>> Hi!
>> 
>> it has just come to my attention that Gitbox at ASF
>> has been enabling full GitHub workflow (with being
>> able to click Merge this PR button, etc.) for quite
>> some time.
>> 
>> This basically allows a project to have GH as a R/W
>> repo as opposed to R/O mirror of what we all currnently
>> have: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf
>> 
>> Personally I'm not sure I like GH workflow all that much,
>> but if there's interest -- you can opt-in into Gitbox. Once
>> you do -- your source of truth moves to GH. You can't
>> have it both ways with git-wip-us.apache.org and Gitbox.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Roman.
> 
> Now that we’ve got some experience with gitbox on geode-native, are we ready 
> to convert the other repos?
> 
> - geode
> - geode-site
> - geode-examples
> 
> I think we should.
> 
> Anthony
> 

Re: Gitbox enables the full GitHub workflow

[Bruce Schuchardt]

+1


On 8/22/17 1:48 PM, Udo Kohlmeyer wrote:

+1 to migrate :)


On 8/22/17 10:43, Anthony Baker wrote:
On Aug 7, 2017, at 6:09 PM, Roman Shaposhnik  
wrote:


Hi!

it has just come to my attention that Gitbox at ASF
has been enabling full GitHub workflow (with being
able to click Merge this PR button, etc.) for quite
some time.

This basically allows a project to have GH as a R/W
repo as opposed to R/O mirror of what we all currnently
have: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf

Personally I'm not sure I like GH workflow all that much,
but if there's interest -- you can opt-in into Gitbox. Once
you do -- your source of truth moves to GH. You can't
have it both ways with git-wip-us.apache.org and Gitbox.

Thanks,
Roman.
Now that we’ve got some experience with gitbox on geode-native, are 
we ready to convert the other repos?


- geode
- geode-site
- geode-examples

I think we should.

Anthony

Re: Gitbox enables the full GitHub workflow

[Udo Kohlmeyer]

+1 to migrate :)


On 8/22/17 10:43, Anthony Baker wrote:

On Aug 7, 2017, at 6:09 PM, Roman Shaposhnik  wrote:

Hi!

it has just come to my attention that Gitbox at ASF
has been enabling full GitHub workflow (with being
able to click Merge this PR button, etc.) for quite
some time.

This basically allows a project to have GH as a R/W
repo as opposed to R/O mirror of what we all currnently
have: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf

Personally I'm not sure I like GH workflow all that much,
but if there's interest -- you can opt-in into Gitbox. Once
you do -- your source of truth moves to GH. You can't
have it both ways with git-wip-us.apache.org and Gitbox.

Thanks,
Roman.

Now that we’ve got some experience with gitbox on geode-native, are we ready to 
convert the other repos?

- geode
- geode-site
- geode-examples

I think we should.

Anthony

Re: Gitbox enables the full GitHub workflow

[Ernest Burghardt]

+1

On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 12:28 PM, Joey McAllister 
wrote:

> +1
>
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 11:28 AM Ken Howe  wrote:
>
> > +1 Yes, let’s make the move
> >
> > > On Aug 22, 2017, at 11:21 AM, Nabarun Nag  wrote:
> > >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 11:15 AM Kirk Lund  wrote:
> > >
> > >> +1 to move all our repos to gitbox
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 11:08 AM, Jacob Barrett 
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> +1
> > >>>
> > >>> Sent from my iPhone
> > >>>
> >  On Aug 22, 2017, at 10:49 AM, Jared Stewart 
> > >> wrote:
> > 
> >  +1 for moving the other repos to Gitbox
> > 
> >  On Aug 22, 2017 10:43 AM, "Anthony Baker" 
> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > > On Aug 7, 2017, at 6:09 PM, Roman Shaposhnik  >
> > >>> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > it has just come to my attention that Gitbox at ASF
> > > has been enabling full GitHub workflow (with being
> > > able to click Merge this PR button, etc.) for quite
> > > some time.
> > >
> > > This basically allows a project to have GH as a R/W
> > > repo as opposed to R/O mirror of what we all currnently
> > > have: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf
> > >
> > > Personally I'm not sure I like GH workflow all that much,
> > > but if there's interest -- you can opt-in into Gitbox. Once
> > > you do -- your source of truth moves to GH. You can't
> > > have it both ways with git-wip-us.apache.org and Gitbox.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Roman.
> > 
> >  Now that we’ve got some experience with gitbox on geode-native, are
> we
> >  ready to convert the other repos?
> > 
> >  - geode
> >  - geode-site
> >  - geode-examples
> > 
> >  I think we should.
> > 
> >  Anthony
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
> >
>

Re: Gitbox enables the full GitHub workflow

[Joey McAllister]

+1

On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 11:28 AM Ken Howe  wrote:

> +1 Yes, let’s make the move
>
> > On Aug 22, 2017, at 11:21 AM, Nabarun Nag  wrote:
> >
> > +1
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 11:15 AM Kirk Lund  wrote:
> >
> >> +1 to move all our repos to gitbox
> >>
> >> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 11:08 AM, Jacob Barrett 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> +1
> >>>
> >>> Sent from my iPhone
> >>>
>  On Aug 22, 2017, at 10:49 AM, Jared Stewart 
> >> wrote:
> 
>  +1 for moving the other repos to Gitbox
> 
>  On Aug 22, 2017 10:43 AM, "Anthony Baker"  wrote:
> 
> 
> > On Aug 7, 2017, at 6:09 PM, Roman Shaposhnik 
> >>> wrote:
> >
> > Hi!
> >
> > it has just come to my attention that Gitbox at ASF
> > has been enabling full GitHub workflow (with being
> > able to click Merge this PR button, etc.) for quite
> > some time.
> >
> > This basically allows a project to have GH as a R/W
> > repo as opposed to R/O mirror of what we all currnently
> > have: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf
> >
> > Personally I'm not sure I like GH workflow all that much,
> > but if there's interest -- you can opt-in into Gitbox. Once
> > you do -- your source of truth moves to GH. You can't
> > have it both ways with git-wip-us.apache.org and Gitbox.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Roman.
> 
>  Now that we’ve got some experience with gitbox on geode-native, are we
>  ready to convert the other repos?
> 
>  - geode
>  - geode-site
>  - geode-examples
> 
>  I think we should.
> 
>  Anthony
> >>>
> >>
>
>

Re: Gitbox enables the full GitHub workflow

[Ken Howe]

+1 Yes, let’s make the move

> On Aug 22, 2017, at 11:21 AM, Nabarun Nag  wrote:
> 
> +1
> 
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 11:15 AM Kirk Lund  wrote:
> 
>> +1 to move all our repos to gitbox
>> 
>> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 11:08 AM, Jacob Barrett 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> +1
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> 
 On Aug 22, 2017, at 10:49 AM, Jared Stewart 
>> wrote:
 
 +1 for moving the other repos to Gitbox
 
 On Aug 22, 2017 10:43 AM, "Anthony Baker"  wrote:
 
 
> On Aug 7, 2017, at 6:09 PM, Roman Shaposhnik 
>>> wrote:
> 
> Hi!
> 
> it has just come to my attention that Gitbox at ASF
> has been enabling full GitHub workflow (with being
> able to click Merge this PR button, etc.) for quite
> some time.
> 
> This basically allows a project to have GH as a R/W
> repo as opposed to R/O mirror of what we all currnently
> have: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf
> 
> Personally I'm not sure I like GH workflow all that much,
> but if there's interest -- you can opt-in into Gitbox. Once
> you do -- your source of truth moves to GH. You can't
> have it both ways with git-wip-us.apache.org and Gitbox.
> 
> Thanks,
> Roman.
 
 Now that we’ve got some experience with gitbox on geode-native, are we
 ready to convert the other repos?
 
 - geode
 - geode-site
 - geode-examples
 
 I think we should.
 
 Anthony
>>> 
>> 

Re: Gitbox enables the full GitHub workflow

[Nabarun Nag]

+1

On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 11:15 AM Kirk Lund  wrote:

> +1 to move all our repos to gitbox
>
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 11:08 AM, Jacob Barrett 
> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > > On Aug 22, 2017, at 10:49 AM, Jared Stewart 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > +1 for moving the other repos to Gitbox
> > >
> > > On Aug 22, 2017 10:43 AM, "Anthony Baker"  wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >> On Aug 7, 2017, at 6:09 PM, Roman Shaposhnik 
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hi!
> > >>
> > >> it has just come to my attention that Gitbox at ASF
> > >> has been enabling full GitHub workflow (with being
> > >> able to click Merge this PR button, etc.) for quite
> > >> some time.
> > >>
> > >> This basically allows a project to have GH as a R/W
> > >> repo as opposed to R/O mirror of what we all currnently
> > >> have: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf
> > >>
> > >> Personally I'm not sure I like GH workflow all that much,
> > >> but if there's interest -- you can opt-in into Gitbox. Once
> > >> you do -- your source of truth moves to GH. You can't
> > >> have it both ways with git-wip-us.apache.org and Gitbox.
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >> Roman.
> > >
> > > Now that we’ve got some experience with gitbox on geode-native, are we
> > > ready to convert the other repos?
> > >
> > > - geode
> > > - geode-site
> > > - geode-examples
> > >
> > > I think we should.
> > >
> > > Anthony
> >
>

Re: Gitbox enables the full GitHub workflow

[Kirk Lund]

+1 to move all our repos to gitbox

On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 11:08 AM, Jacob Barrett  wrote:

> +1
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Aug 22, 2017, at 10:49 AM, Jared Stewart  wrote:
> >
> > +1 for moving the other repos to Gitbox
> >
> > On Aug 22, 2017 10:43 AM, "Anthony Baker"  wrote:
> >
> >
> >> On Aug 7, 2017, at 6:09 PM, Roman Shaposhnik 
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi!
> >>
> >> it has just come to my attention that Gitbox at ASF
> >> has been enabling full GitHub workflow (with being
> >> able to click Merge this PR button, etc.) for quite
> >> some time.
> >>
> >> This basically allows a project to have GH as a R/W
> >> repo as opposed to R/O mirror of what we all currnently
> >> have: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf
> >>
> >> Personally I'm not sure I like GH workflow all that much,
> >> but if there's interest -- you can opt-in into Gitbox. Once
> >> you do -- your source of truth moves to GH. You can't
> >> have it both ways with git-wip-us.apache.org and Gitbox.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Roman.
> >
> > Now that we’ve got some experience with gitbox on geode-native, are we
> > ready to convert the other repos?
> >
> > - geode
> > - geode-site
> > - geode-examples
> >
> > I think we should.
> >
> > Anthony
>

Re: Gitbox enables the full GitHub workflow

[Jacob Barrett]

+1

Sent from my iPhone

> On Aug 22, 2017, at 10:49 AM, Jared Stewart  wrote:
> 
> +1 for moving the other repos to Gitbox
> 
> On Aug 22, 2017 10:43 AM, "Anthony Baker"  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Aug 7, 2017, at 6:09 PM, Roman Shaposhnik  wrote:
>> 
>> Hi!
>> 
>> it has just come to my attention that Gitbox at ASF
>> has been enabling full GitHub workflow (with being
>> able to click Merge this PR button, etc.) for quite
>> some time.
>> 
>> This basically allows a project to have GH as a R/W
>> repo as opposed to R/O mirror of what we all currnently
>> have: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf
>> 
>> Personally I'm not sure I like GH workflow all that much,
>> but if there's interest -- you can opt-in into Gitbox. Once
>> you do -- your source of truth moves to GH. You can't
>> have it both ways with git-wip-us.apache.org and Gitbox.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Roman.
> 
> Now that we’ve got some experience with gitbox on geode-native, are we
> ready to convert the other repos?
> 
> - geode
> - geode-site
> - geode-examples
> 
> I think we should.
> 
> Anthony

Re: Gitbox enables the full GitHub workflow

[Dan Smith]

+1 - Let's do it!

-Dan

On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 10:58 AM, Dave Barnes  wrote:

> +1
> I'm interested to see how it works for geode-site, which has a sorta quirky
> build/branch structure.
>
> On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 10:49 AM, Jared Stewart 
> wrote:
>
> > +1 for moving the other repos to Gitbox
> >
> > On Aug 22, 2017 10:43 AM, "Anthony Baker"  wrote:
> >
> >
> > > On Aug 7, 2017, at 6:09 PM, Roman Shaposhnik 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > it has just come to my attention that Gitbox at ASF
> > > has been enabling full GitHub workflow (with being
> > > able to click Merge this PR button, etc.) for quite
> > > some time.
> > >
> > > This basically allows a project to have GH as a R/W
> > > repo as opposed to R/O mirror of what we all currnently
> > > have: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf
> > >
> > > Personally I'm not sure I like GH workflow all that much,
> > > but if there's interest -- you can opt-in into Gitbox. Once
> > > you do -- your source of truth moves to GH. You can't
> > > have it both ways with git-wip-us.apache.org and Gitbox.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Roman.
> >
> > Now that we’ve got some experience with gitbox on geode-native, are we
> > ready to convert the other repos?
> >
> > - geode
> > - geode-site
> > - geode-examples
> >
> > I think we should.
> >
> > Anthony
> >
>

Re: Gitbox enables the full GitHub workflow

[Dave Barnes]

+1
I'm interested to see how it works for geode-site, which has a sorta quirky
build/branch structure.

On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 10:49 AM, Jared Stewart  wrote:

> +1 for moving the other repos to Gitbox
>
> On Aug 22, 2017 10:43 AM, "Anthony Baker"  wrote:
>
>
> > On Aug 7, 2017, at 6:09 PM, Roman Shaposhnik 
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi!
> >
> > it has just come to my attention that Gitbox at ASF
> > has been enabling full GitHub workflow (with being
> > able to click Merge this PR button, etc.) for quite
> > some time.
> >
> > This basically allows a project to have GH as a R/W
> > repo as opposed to R/O mirror of what we all currnently
> > have: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf
> >
> > Personally I'm not sure I like GH workflow all that much,
> > but if there's interest -- you can opt-in into Gitbox. Once
> > you do -- your source of truth moves to GH. You can't
> > have it both ways with git-wip-us.apache.org and Gitbox.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Roman.
>
> Now that we’ve got some experience with gitbox on geode-native, are we
> ready to convert the other repos?
>
> - geode
> - geode-site
> - geode-examples
>
> I think we should.
>
> Anthony
>

Re: Gitbox enables the full GitHub workflow

[Jared Stewart]

+1 for moving the other repos to Gitbox

On Aug 22, 2017 10:43 AM, "Anthony Baker"  wrote:


> On Aug 7, 2017, at 6:09 PM, Roman Shaposhnik  wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> it has just come to my attention that Gitbox at ASF
> has been enabling full GitHub workflow (with being
> able to click Merge this PR button, etc.) for quite
> some time.
>
> This basically allows a project to have GH as a R/W
> repo as opposed to R/O mirror of what we all currnently
> have: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf
>
> Personally I'm not sure I like GH workflow all that much,
> but if there's interest -- you can opt-in into Gitbox. Once
> you do -- your source of truth moves to GH. You can't
> have it both ways with git-wip-us.apache.org and Gitbox.
>
> Thanks,
> Roman.

Now that we’ve got some experience with gitbox on geode-native, are we
ready to convert the other repos?

- geode
- geode-site
- geode-examples

I think we should.

Anthony

Re: Gitbox enables the full GitHub workflow

[Anthony Baker]

> On Aug 7, 2017, at 6:09 PM, Roman Shaposhnik  wrote:
> 
> Hi!
> 
> it has just come to my attention that Gitbox at ASF
> has been enabling full GitHub workflow (with being
> able to click Merge this PR button, etc.) for quite
> some time.
> 
> This basically allows a project to have GH as a R/W
> repo as opposed to R/O mirror of what we all currnently
> have: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf
> 
> Personally I'm not sure I like GH workflow all that much,
> but if there's interest -- you can opt-in into Gitbox. Once
> you do -- your source of truth moves to GH. You can't
> have it both ways with git-wip-us.apache.org and Gitbox.
> 
> Thanks,
> Roman.

Now that we’ve got some experience with gitbox on geode-native, are we ready to 
convert the other repos?

- geode
- geode-site
- geode-examples

I think we should.

Anthony

Re: Gitbox enables the full GitHub workflow

[Jacob Barrett]

Awesome! Thanks!

On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 4:27 PM Mark Bretl  wrote:

> Ticket created, https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14876
>
> Lets see where it goes...
>
> --Mark
>
> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 2:13 PM, Jacob Barrett 
> wrote:
>
> > Mark, if you want the experience for the next repo you should do it.
> > Thanks!
> >
> > -Jake
> >
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > > On Aug 14, 2017, at 1:17 PM, Ernest Burghardt 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Mark, Go ahead and file it and geode-native will be the canaries...
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Ernie
> > >
> > >> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Mark Bretl 
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Since we have people wanting this and need a small experiment group to
> > >> blaze the trail for us, I think the geode-native would be a good
> choice
> > >> since it has active PRs and commits. Looks like the process to migrate
> > from
> > >> Git@ASF to GitHub is to create an INFRA ticket with type 'Gitbox
> > Request'.
> > >>
> > >> Jake, do you want to file the ticket or I can do it?
> > >>
> > >> --Mark
> > >>
> > >> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 12:42 PM, Jacob Barrett 
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Well, I am not seeing any -1 votes for this switch. Let's make the
> > >> change.
> > >>>
> > >>> Any takers for following up with Inra to make this go?
> > >>>
> > >>> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 6:49 PM Jacob Barrett 
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>
> >  +1 for Gitbox
> > 
> >  This will greatly simplify the workflow committers go through with
> > pull
> >  requests from the community. It will also allow us to close out
> pulls
> > >>> that
> >  go dark. On our local repos we would really have no need to ever
> > >> include
> >  the apache repo so it reduces the number of remotes we need to
> track.
> > 
> >  -Jake
> > 
> >  Sent from my iPhone
> > 
> > > On Aug 7, 2017, at 6:09 PM, Roman Shaposhnik  >
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > it has just come to my attention that Gitbox at ASF
> > > has been enabling full GitHub workflow (with being
> > > able to click Merge this PR button, etc.) for quite
> > > some time.
> > >
> > > This basically allows a project to have GH as a R/W
> > > repo as opposed to R/O mirror of what we all currnently
> > > have: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf
> > >
> > > Personally I'm not sure I like GH workflow all that much,
> > > but if there's interest -- you can opt-in into Gitbox. Once
> > > you do -- your source of truth moves to GH. You can't
> > > have it both ways with git-wip-us.apache.org and Gitbox.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Roman.
> > 
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
>

Re: Gitbox enables the full GitHub workflow

[Mark Bretl]

Ticket created, https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14876

Lets see where it goes...

--Mark

On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 2:13 PM, Jacob Barrett  wrote:

> Mark, if you want the experience for the next repo you should do it.
> Thanks!
>
> -Jake
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Aug 14, 2017, at 1:17 PM, Ernest Burghardt 
> wrote:
> >
> > Mark, Go ahead and file it and geode-native will be the canaries...
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Ernie
> >
> >> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Mark Bretl  wrote:
> >>
> >> Since we have people wanting this and need a small experiment group to
> >> blaze the trail for us, I think the geode-native would be a good choice
> >> since it has active PRs and commits. Looks like the process to migrate
> from
> >> Git@ASF to GitHub is to create an INFRA ticket with type 'Gitbox
> Request'.
> >>
> >> Jake, do you want to file the ticket or I can do it?
> >>
> >> --Mark
> >>
> >> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 12:42 PM, Jacob Barrett 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Well, I am not seeing any -1 votes for this switch. Let's make the
> >> change.
> >>>
> >>> Any takers for following up with Inra to make this go?
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 6:49 PM Jacob Barrett 
> >> wrote:
> >>>
>  +1 for Gitbox
> 
>  This will greatly simplify the workflow committers go through with
> pull
>  requests from the community. It will also allow us to close out pulls
> >>> that
>  go dark. On our local repos we would really have no need to ever
> >> include
>  the apache repo so it reduces the number of remotes we need to track.
> 
>  -Jake
> 
>  Sent from my iPhone
> 
> > On Aug 7, 2017, at 6:09 PM, Roman Shaposhnik 
>  wrote:
> >
> > Hi!
> >
> > it has just come to my attention that Gitbox at ASF
> > has been enabling full GitHub workflow (with being
> > able to click Merge this PR button, etc.) for quite
> > some time.
> >
> > This basically allows a project to have GH as a R/W
> > repo as opposed to R/O mirror of what we all currnently
> > have: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf
> >
> > Personally I'm not sure I like GH workflow all that much,
> > but if there's interest -- you can opt-in into Gitbox. Once
> > you do -- your source of truth moves to GH. You can't
> > have it both ways with git-wip-us.apache.org and Gitbox.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Roman.
> 
> >>>
> >>
>

Re: Gitbox enables the full GitHub workflow

[Jacob Barrett]

Mark, if you want the experience for the next repo you should do it. Thanks!

-Jake


Sent from my iPhone

> On Aug 14, 2017, at 1:17 PM, Ernest Burghardt  wrote:
> 
> Mark, Go ahead and file it and geode-native will be the canaries...
> 
> Thanks,
> Ernie
> 
>> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Mark Bretl  wrote:
>> 
>> Since we have people wanting this and need a small experiment group to
>> blaze the trail for us, I think the geode-native would be a good choice
>> since it has active PRs and commits. Looks like the process to migrate from
>> Git@ASF to GitHub is to create an INFRA ticket with type 'Gitbox Request'.
>> 
>> Jake, do you want to file the ticket or I can do it?
>> 
>> --Mark
>> 
>> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 12:42 PM, Jacob Barrett 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Well, I am not seeing any -1 votes for this switch. Let's make the
>> change.
>>> 
>>> Any takers for following up with Inra to make this go?
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 6:49 PM Jacob Barrett 
>> wrote:
>>> 
 +1 for Gitbox
 
 This will greatly simplify the workflow committers go through with pull
 requests from the community. It will also allow us to close out pulls
>>> that
 go dark. On our local repos we would really have no need to ever
>> include
 the apache repo so it reduces the number of remotes we need to track.
 
 -Jake
 
 Sent from my iPhone
 
> On Aug 7, 2017, at 6:09 PM, Roman Shaposhnik 
 wrote:
> 
> Hi!
> 
> it has just come to my attention that Gitbox at ASF
> has been enabling full GitHub workflow (with being
> able to click Merge this PR button, etc.) for quite
> some time.
> 
> This basically allows a project to have GH as a R/W
> repo as opposed to R/O mirror of what we all currnently
> have: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf
> 
> Personally I'm not sure I like GH workflow all that much,
> but if there's interest -- you can opt-in into Gitbox. Once
> you do -- your source of truth moves to GH. You can't
> have it both ways with git-wip-us.apache.org and Gitbox.
> 
> Thanks,
> Roman.
 
>>> 
>> 

Re: Gitbox enables the full GitHub workflow

[Ernest Burghardt]

Mark, Go ahead and file it and geode-native will be the canaries...

Thanks,
Ernie

On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 2:16 PM, Mark Bretl  wrote:

> Since we have people wanting this and need a small experiment group to
> blaze the trail for us, I think the geode-native would be a good choice
> since it has active PRs and commits. Looks like the process to migrate from
> Git@ASF to GitHub is to create an INFRA ticket with type 'Gitbox Request'.
>
> Jake, do you want to file the ticket or I can do it?
>
> --Mark
>
> On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 12:42 PM, Jacob Barrett 
> wrote:
>
> > Well, I am not seeing any -1 votes for this switch. Let's make the
> change.
> >
> > Any takers for following up with Inra to make this go?
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 6:49 PM Jacob Barrett 
> wrote:
> >
> > > +1 for Gitbox
> > >
> > > This will greatly simplify the workflow committers go through with pull
> > > requests from the community. It will also allow us to close out pulls
> > that
> > > go dark. On our local repos we would really have no need to ever
> include
> > > the apache repo so it reduces the number of remotes we need to track.
> > >
> > > -Jake
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPhone
> > >
> > > > On Aug 7, 2017, at 6:09 PM, Roman Shaposhnik 
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi!
> > > >
> > > > it has just come to my attention that Gitbox at ASF
> > > > has been enabling full GitHub workflow (with being
> > > > able to click Merge this PR button, etc.) for quite
> > > > some time.
> > > >
> > > > This basically allows a project to have GH as a R/W
> > > > repo as opposed to R/O mirror of what we all currnently
> > > > have: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf
> > > >
> > > > Personally I'm not sure I like GH workflow all that much,
> > > > but if there's interest -- you can opt-in into Gitbox. Once
> > > > you do -- your source of truth moves to GH. You can't
> > > > have it both ways with git-wip-us.apache.org and Gitbox.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Roman.
> > >
> >
>

Re: Gitbox enables the full GitHub workflow

[Mark Bretl]

Since we have people wanting this and need a small experiment group to
blaze the trail for us, I think the geode-native would be a good choice
since it has active PRs and commits. Looks like the process to migrate from
Git@ASF to GitHub is to create an INFRA ticket with type 'Gitbox Request'.

Jake, do you want to file the ticket or I can do it?

--Mark

On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 12:42 PM, Jacob Barrett  wrote:

> Well, I am not seeing any -1 votes for this switch. Let's make the change.
>
> Any takers for following up with Inra to make this go?
>
> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 6:49 PM Jacob Barrett  wrote:
>
> > +1 for Gitbox
> >
> > This will greatly simplify the workflow committers go through with pull
> > requests from the community. It will also allow us to close out pulls
> that
> > go dark. On our local repos we would really have no need to ever include
> > the apache repo so it reduces the number of remotes we need to track.
> >
> > -Jake
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > > On Aug 7, 2017, at 6:09 PM, Roman Shaposhnik 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > it has just come to my attention that Gitbox at ASF
> > > has been enabling full GitHub workflow (with being
> > > able to click Merge this PR button, etc.) for quite
> > > some time.
> > >
> > > This basically allows a project to have GH as a R/W
> > > repo as opposed to R/O mirror of what we all currnently
> > > have: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf
> > >
> > > Personally I'm not sure I like GH workflow all that much,
> > > but if there's interest -- you can opt-in into Gitbox. Once
> > > you do -- your source of truth moves to GH. You can't
> > > have it both ways with git-wip-us.apache.org and Gitbox.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Roman.
> >
>

Re: Gitbox enables the full GitHub workflow

[Jacob Barrett]

Well, I am not seeing any -1 votes for this switch. Let's make the change.

Any takers for following up with Inra to make this go?

On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 6:49 PM Jacob Barrett  wrote:

> +1 for Gitbox
>
> This will greatly simplify the workflow committers go through with pull
> requests from the community. It will also allow us to close out pulls that
> go dark. On our local repos we would really have no need to ever include
> the apache repo so it reduces the number of remotes we need to track.
>
> -Jake
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Aug 7, 2017, at 6:09 PM, Roman Shaposhnik 
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi!
> >
> > it has just come to my attention that Gitbox at ASF
> > has been enabling full GitHub workflow (with being
> > able to click Merge this PR button, etc.) for quite
> > some time.
> >
> > This basically allows a project to have GH as a R/W
> > repo as opposed to R/O mirror of what we all currnently
> > have: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf
> >
> > Personally I'm not sure I like GH workflow all that much,
> > but if there's interest -- you can opt-in into Gitbox. Once
> > you do -- your source of truth moves to GH. You can't
> > have it both ways with git-wip-us.apache.org and Gitbox.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Roman.
>

Re: Gitbox enables the full GitHub workflow

[Jacob Barrett]

The geode-native synch from ASF to GitHub is stuck again and while we are
waiting for Infra to make the fix it occurred to me it might be more
productive to have them just move us to GitBox. We have another big commit
coming that will likely break the commit again. Does anyone object to
geode-native being the guinea pig for GitBox?

Re: Gitbox enables the full GitHub workflow

[Ernest Burghardt]

+1

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 2:57 PM, Nabarun Nag  wrote:

> +1
>
> will this allow us to choose reviewers while creating PRs on github now?
>
> Regards
> Nabarun
>
> On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 1:19 PM Udo Kohlmeyer 
> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> >
> > On 8/9/17 12:56, Anthony Baker wrote:
> > > +1
> > >
> > >> On Aug 8, 2017, at 12:46 PM, Mark Bretl  wrote:
> > >>
> > >> +1 for Gitbox
> > >>
> > >> I have been watching threads on INFRA list and been waiting to see
> when
> > a
> > >> good time would be to introduce the idea to the community. The Gitbox
> > >> project has been going since the end of 2016 and looks as though it
> > might
> > >> be ready now as INFRA has begun moving some of their repositories to
> > >> GitHub. We still need to 'apply' by submitting a ticket to INFRA and
> > wait
> > >> for approval, INFRA could still deny the move.
> > >>
> > >> Advantages:
> > >> - GitHub PRs are fully functional (something which stopped us earlier)
> > >> - Provides ability to align committer and non-committer workflows
> > >> - Removing mirror from Git at Apache to GitHub and thus removing delay
> > in
> > >> sync
> > >>
> > >> Disadvantages:
> > >> - Permission mapping is configured on id.apache.org (need to set
> > GitHub ID)
> > >>
> > >> I can't think of many disadvantages to moving to GitBox.
> > >>
> > >> --Mark
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 10:56 AM, Dan Smith  wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> I'm in favor of switching to gitbox. We're already getting pretty
> much
> > all
> > >>> contributions from non-committers coming in as pull requests so we
> > might as
> > >>> well make it easier for us to manage things in github.
> > >>>
> > >>> -Dan
> > >>>
> > >>> On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 8:57 AM, Kirk Lund  wrote:
> > >>>
> >  One thing that's given me trouble is that the mirroring of ASF git
> > (for
> >  Apache Geode) to github can have a lengthy delay. In other words,
> > after I
> >  commit to ASF git, it's not uncommon for my commit to not show up in
> > the
> >  GitHub mirror right away and I've seen this delay take an hour.
> > 
> >  On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <
> > ro...@shaposhnik.org>
> >  wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > it has just come to my attention that Gitbox at ASF
> > > has been enabling full GitHub workflow (with being
> > > able to click Merge this PR button, etc.) for quite
> > > some time.
> > >
> > > This basically allows a project to have GH as a R/W
> > > repo as opposed to R/O mirror of what we all currnently
> > > have: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf
> > >
> > > Personally I'm not sure I like GH workflow all that much,
> > > but if there's interest -- you can opt-in into Gitbox. Once
> > > you do -- your source of truth moves to GH. You can't
> > > have it both ways with git-wip-us.apache.org and Gitbox.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Roman.
> > >
> >
> >
>

Re: Gitbox enables the full GitHub workflow

[Nabarun Nag]

+1

will this allow us to choose reviewers while creating PRs on github now?

Regards
Nabarun

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 1:19 PM Udo Kohlmeyer  wrote:

> +1
>
>
> On 8/9/17 12:56, Anthony Baker wrote:
> > +1
> >
> >> On Aug 8, 2017, at 12:46 PM, Mark Bretl  wrote:
> >>
> >> +1 for Gitbox
> >>
> >> I have been watching threads on INFRA list and been waiting to see when
> a
> >> good time would be to introduce the idea to the community. The Gitbox
> >> project has been going since the end of 2016 and looks as though it
> might
> >> be ready now as INFRA has begun moving some of their repositories to
> >> GitHub. We still need to 'apply' by submitting a ticket to INFRA and
> wait
> >> for approval, INFRA could still deny the move.
> >>
> >> Advantages:
> >> - GitHub PRs are fully functional (something which stopped us earlier)
> >> - Provides ability to align committer and non-committer workflows
> >> - Removing mirror from Git at Apache to GitHub and thus removing delay
> in
> >> sync
> >>
> >> Disadvantages:
> >> - Permission mapping is configured on id.apache.org (need to set
> GitHub ID)
> >>
> >> I can't think of many disadvantages to moving to GitBox.
> >>
> >> --Mark
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 10:56 AM, Dan Smith  wrote:
> >>
> >>> I'm in favor of switching to gitbox. We're already getting pretty much
> all
> >>> contributions from non-committers coming in as pull requests so we
> might as
> >>> well make it easier for us to manage things in github.
> >>>
> >>> -Dan
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 8:57 AM, Kirk Lund  wrote:
> >>>
>  One thing that's given me trouble is that the mirroring of ASF git
> (for
>  Apache Geode) to github can have a lengthy delay. In other words,
> after I
>  commit to ASF git, it's not uncommon for my commit to not show up in
> the
>  GitHub mirror right away and I've seen this delay take an hour.
> 
>  On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <
> ro...@shaposhnik.org>
>  wrote:
> 
> > Hi!
> >
> > it has just come to my attention that Gitbox at ASF
> > has been enabling full GitHub workflow (with being
> > able to click Merge this PR button, etc.) for quite
> > some time.
> >
> > This basically allows a project to have GH as a R/W
> > repo as opposed to R/O mirror of what we all currnently
> > have: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf
> >
> > Personally I'm not sure I like GH workflow all that much,
> > but if there's interest -- you can opt-in into Gitbox. Once
> > you do -- your source of truth moves to GH. You can't
> > have it both ways with git-wip-us.apache.org and Gitbox.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Roman.
> >
>
>

Re: Gitbox enables the full GitHub workflow

[Udo Kohlmeyer]

+1


On 8/9/17 12:56, Anthony Baker wrote:

+1


On Aug 8, 2017, at 12:46 PM, Mark Bretl  wrote:

+1 for Gitbox

I have been watching threads on INFRA list and been waiting to see when a
good time would be to introduce the idea to the community. The Gitbox
project has been going since the end of 2016 and looks as though it might
be ready now as INFRA has begun moving some of their repositories to
GitHub. We still need to 'apply' by submitting a ticket to INFRA and wait
for approval, INFRA could still deny the move.

Advantages:
- GitHub PRs are fully functional (something which stopped us earlier)
- Provides ability to align committer and non-committer workflows
- Removing mirror from Git at Apache to GitHub and thus removing delay in
sync

Disadvantages:
- Permission mapping is configured on id.apache.org (need to set GitHub ID)

I can't think of many disadvantages to moving to GitBox.

--Mark


On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 10:56 AM, Dan Smith  wrote:


I'm in favor of switching to gitbox. We're already getting pretty much all
contributions from non-committers coming in as pull requests so we might as
well make it easier for us to manage things in github.

-Dan

On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 8:57 AM, Kirk Lund  wrote:


One thing that's given me trouble is that the mirroring of ASF git (for
Apache Geode) to github can have a lengthy delay. In other words, after I
commit to ASF git, it's not uncommon for my commit to not show up in the
GitHub mirror right away and I've seen this delay take an hour.

On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Roman Shaposhnik 
wrote:


Hi!

it has just come to my attention that Gitbox at ASF
has been enabling full GitHub workflow (with being
able to click Merge this PR button, etc.) for quite
some time.

This basically allows a project to have GH as a R/W
repo as opposed to R/O mirror of what we all currnently
have: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf

Personally I'm not sure I like GH workflow all that much,
but if there's interest -- you can opt-in into Gitbox. Once
you do -- your source of truth moves to GH. You can't
have it both ways with git-wip-us.apache.org and Gitbox.

Thanks,
Roman.

Re: Gitbox enables the full GitHub workflow

[Anthony Baker]

+1

> On Aug 8, 2017, at 12:46 PM, Mark Bretl  wrote:
> 
> +1 for Gitbox
> 
> I have been watching threads on INFRA list and been waiting to see when a
> good time would be to introduce the idea to the community. The Gitbox
> project has been going since the end of 2016 and looks as though it might
> be ready now as INFRA has begun moving some of their repositories to
> GitHub. We still need to 'apply' by submitting a ticket to INFRA and wait
> for approval, INFRA could still deny the move.
> 
> Advantages:
> - GitHub PRs are fully functional (something which stopped us earlier)
> - Provides ability to align committer and non-committer workflows
> - Removing mirror from Git at Apache to GitHub and thus removing delay in
> sync
> 
> Disadvantages:
> - Permission mapping is configured on id.apache.org (need to set GitHub ID)
> 
> I can't think of many disadvantages to moving to GitBox.
> 
> --Mark
> 
> 
> On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 10:56 AM, Dan Smith  wrote:
> 
>> I'm in favor of switching to gitbox. We're already getting pretty much all
>> contributions from non-committers coming in as pull requests so we might as
>> well make it easier for us to manage things in github.
>> 
>> -Dan
>> 
>> On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 8:57 AM, Kirk Lund  wrote:
>> 
>>> One thing that's given me trouble is that the mirroring of ASF git (for
>>> Apache Geode) to github can have a lengthy delay. In other words, after I
>>> commit to ASF git, it's not uncommon for my commit to not show up in the
>>> GitHub mirror right away and I've seen this delay take an hour.
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Roman Shaposhnik 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
 Hi!
 
 it has just come to my attention that Gitbox at ASF
 has been enabling full GitHub workflow (with being
 able to click Merge this PR button, etc.) for quite
 some time.
 
 This basically allows a project to have GH as a R/W
 repo as opposed to R/O mirror of what we all currnently
 have: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf
 
 Personally I'm not sure I like GH workflow all that much,
 but if there's interest -- you can opt-in into Gitbox. Once
 you do -- your source of truth moves to GH. You can't
 have it both ways with git-wip-us.apache.org and Gitbox.
 
 Thanks,
 Roman.
 
>>> 
>> 

Re: Gitbox enables the full GitHub workflow

[Mark Bretl]

+1 for Gitbox

I have been watching threads on INFRA list and been waiting to see when a
good time would be to introduce the idea to the community. The Gitbox
project has been going since the end of 2016 and looks as though it might
be ready now as INFRA has begun moving some of their repositories to
GitHub. We still need to 'apply' by submitting a ticket to INFRA and wait
for approval, INFRA could still deny the move.

Advantages:
- GitHub PRs are fully functional (something which stopped us earlier)
- Provides ability to align committer and non-committer workflows
- Removing mirror from Git at Apache to GitHub and thus removing delay in
sync

Disadvantages:
- Permission mapping is configured on id.apache.org (need to set GitHub ID)

I can't think of many disadvantages to moving to GitBox.

--Mark


On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 10:56 AM, Dan Smith  wrote:

> I'm in favor of switching to gitbox. We're already getting pretty much all
> contributions from non-committers coming in as pull requests so we might as
> well make it easier for us to manage things in github.
>
> -Dan
>
> On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 8:57 AM, Kirk Lund  wrote:
>
> > One thing that's given me trouble is that the mirroring of ASF git (for
> > Apache Geode) to github can have a lengthy delay. In other words, after I
> > commit to ASF git, it's not uncommon for my commit to not show up in the
> > GitHub mirror right away and I've seen this delay take an hour.
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Roman Shaposhnik 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > it has just come to my attention that Gitbox at ASF
> > > has been enabling full GitHub workflow (with being
> > > able to click Merge this PR button, etc.) for quite
> > > some time.
> > >
> > > This basically allows a project to have GH as a R/W
> > > repo as opposed to R/O mirror of what we all currnently
> > > have: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf
> > >
> > > Personally I'm not sure I like GH workflow all that much,
> > > but if there's interest -- you can opt-in into Gitbox. Once
> > > you do -- your source of truth moves to GH. You can't
> > > have it both ways with git-wip-us.apache.org and Gitbox.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Roman.
> > >
> >
>

Re: Gitbox enables the full GitHub workflow

[Kirk Lund]

One thing that's given me trouble is that the mirroring of ASF git (for
Apache Geode) to github can have a lengthy delay. In other words, after I
commit to ASF git, it's not uncommon for my commit to not show up in the
GitHub mirror right away and I've seen this delay take an hour.

On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Roman Shaposhnik 
wrote:

> Hi!
>
> it has just come to my attention that Gitbox at ASF
> has been enabling full GitHub workflow (with being
> able to click Merge this PR button, etc.) for quite
> some time.
>
> This basically allows a project to have GH as a R/W
> repo as opposed to R/O mirror of what we all currnently
> have: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf
>
> Personally I'm not sure I like GH workflow all that much,
> but if there's interest -- you can opt-in into Gitbox. Once
> you do -- your source of truth moves to GH. You can't
> have it both ways with git-wip-us.apache.org and Gitbox.
>
> Thanks,
> Roman.
>

Re: Gitbox enables the full GitHub workflow

[Hong]

Good to know!! The problem for Github issues is that the id is not
continuous(the id space is shared with Github's issues and pull requests)
which is not a good design IMO.

Hong

2017-08-08 10:01 GMT+08:00 Lei Chang :

> cool. this will simplify the commit workflow a lot.
>
> And if we can use github issues instead of apache JIRA, that will be more
> convenient.
>
> Cheers
> Lei
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 9:09 AM, Roman Shaposhnik 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi!
> >
> > it has just come to my attention that Gitbox at ASF
> > has been enabling full GitHub workflow (with being
> > able to click Merge this PR button, etc.) for quite
> > some time.
> >
> > This basically allows a project to have GH as a R/W
> > repo as opposed to R/O mirror of what we all currnently
> > have: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf
> >
> > Personally I'm not sure I like GH workflow all that much,
> > but if there's interest -- you can opt-in into Gitbox. Once
> > you do -- your source of truth moves to GH. You can't
> > have it both ways with git-wip-us.apache.org and Gitbox.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Roman.
> >
>

Re: Gitbox enables the full GitHub workflow

[Lei Chang]

cool. this will simplify the commit workflow a lot.

And if we can use github issues instead of apache JIRA, that will be more
convenient.

Cheers
Lei




On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 9:09 AM, Roman Shaposhnik 
wrote:

> Hi!
>
> it has just come to my attention that Gitbox at ASF
> has been enabling full GitHub workflow (with being
> able to click Merge this PR button, etc.) for quite
> some time.
>
> This basically allows a project to have GH as a R/W
> repo as opposed to R/O mirror of what we all currnently
> have: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf
>
> Personally I'm not sure I like GH workflow all that much,
> but if there's interest -- you can opt-in into Gitbox. Once
> you do -- your source of truth moves to GH. You can't
> have it both ways with git-wip-us.apache.org and Gitbox.
>
> Thanks,
> Roman.
>

Re: Gitbox enables the full GitHub workflow

[Jacob Barrett]

+1 for Gitbox

This will greatly simplify the workflow committers go through with pull 
requests from the community. It will also allow us to close out pulls that go 
dark. On our local repos we would really have no need to ever include the 
apache repo so it reduces the number of remotes we need to track. 

-Jake

Sent from my iPhone

> On Aug 7, 2017, at 6:09 PM, Roman Shaposhnik  wrote:
> 
> Hi!
> 
> it has just come to my attention that Gitbox at ASF
> has been enabling full GitHub workflow (with being
> able to click Merge this PR button, etc.) for quite
> some time.
> 
> This basically allows a project to have GH as a R/W
> repo as opposed to R/O mirror of what we all currnently
> have: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf
> 
> Personally I'm not sure I like GH workflow all that much,
> but if there's interest -- you can opt-in into Gitbox. Once
> you do -- your source of truth moves to GH. You can't
> have it both ways with git-wip-us.apache.org and Gitbox.
> 
> Thanks,
> Roman.

Gitbox enables the full GitHub workflow

[Roman Shaposhnik]

Hi!

it has just come to my attention that Gitbox at ASF
has been enabling full GitHub workflow (with being
able to click Merge this PR button, etc.) for quite
some time.

This basically allows a project to have GH as a R/W
repo as opposed to R/O mirror of what we all currnently
have: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf

Personally I'm not sure I like GH workflow all that much,
but if there's interest -- you can opt-in into Gitbox. Once
you do -- your source of truth moves to GH. You can't
have it both ways with git-wip-us.apache.org and Gitbox.

Thanks,
Roman.