You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@commons.apache.org by James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> on 2013/10/10 16:41:11 UTC
[VOTE] Moving to Git...
All,
We have had some great discussions about moving our SCM to Git. I
think it's time to put it to a vote. So, here we go:
+1 - yes, move to Git
-1 - no, do not move to Git
The vote will be left open for 72 hours. Go!
James
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Moving to Git...
Posted by James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>.
The ASF has already set up "official" support for Git for their
projects. These technical details have already been worked out.
There are MANY other projects using Git already (around 1/3 I
believe).
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Jörg Schaible
<Jo...@scalaris.com> wrote:
> James Carman wrote:
>
>> All,
>>
>> We have had some great discussions about moving our SCM to Git. I
>> think it's time to put it to a vote. So, here we go:
>>
>> +1 - yes, move to Git
>> -1 - no, do not move to Git
>>
>> The vote will be left open for 72 hours. Go!
>>
>> James
>
>
> -1
>
> We have to ensure before that our tooling works with Git and that we stay
> compliant to ASF rules:
>
> - Release from a Git branch (if we start increasing major versions more
> frequently, we will have soon the requirement for maintenance releases).
> AFAICS there are still problems for Maven.
> - Someone raised the question about the shared stuff like site ... is that
> solved?
> - Which Git server has the master? At Apache? At Github? If Github, legal
> consequences? If Apache, automated sync with Github?
>
> No objection on the switch in general though.
>
> Cheers,
> Jörg
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Moving to Git...
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 12:01 PM, James Carman
<ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 11:09 AM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Great point. Sounds like someone needs to experiment and show that it
>> can be done. Since James started the vote,, perhaps he'd care to pick
>> one Commons component and try to release through git...
>>
>
> How about this? I'm now on the Camel PMC. How about I offer to be a
> release manager for a maintenance release of Camel? This way, I can
> learn from a working git-based project about how they do it and bring
> that knowledge back to us. The instructions appear to just use the
> standard maven release plugin. We can "borrow" stuff from their Maven
> setup of we want.
That sounds great!
Gary
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
--
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
JUnit in Action, Second Edition
Spring Batch in Action
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Moving to Git...
Posted by James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>.
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 11:09 AM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Great point. Sounds like someone needs to experiment and show that it
> can be done. Since James started the vote,, perhaps he'd care to pick
> one Commons component and try to release through git...
>
How about this? I'm now on the Camel PMC. How about I offer to be a
release manager for a maintenance release of Camel? This way, I can
learn from a working git-based project about how they do it and bring
that knowledge back to us. The instructions appear to just use the
standard maven release plugin. We can "borrow" stuff from their Maven
setup of we want.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Moving to Git...
Posted by Jörg Schaible <Jo...@scalaris.com>.
James Carman wrote:
> How is that any different than SVN? We have to release from branches
> with SVN too. We don't copy our "maintenance" branches to trunk in
> order to do releases.
The SCM providers in Maven were not written with Git in mind, the Git
provider is quite new compared to mature Svn provider and there have been
(also recently) reports form people that have problems to release from
branch with Maven.
It's *not* a problem of Git, it might be a problem with the tooling.
- Jörg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Moving to Git...
Posted by Christian Grobmeier <gr...@gmail.com>.
On 10 Oct 2013, at 18:43, Jörg Schaible wrote:
> Hi James,
>
> James Carman wrote:
>
>> Sorry, didn't understand your question. The Apache Camel team uses
>> Git and they release maintenance versions all the time (I believe
>> about 3 or 4 at a time sometimes when a bug fix gets merged down).
>> Here's a list of the current projects using Git:
>>
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf
>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=camel.git;a=heads
>
> OK, this is an evidence that they are able to release from branch and they
> use the Maven release plugin. If they can manage, so can we.
I use mvn to release from git (branches) in my daily work.
In addition I did the same for https://github.com/grobmeier/jjson
which is pretty similar to the usual Commons components.
I also used Nexus for the latest release, no problems.
Cheers
> - Jörg
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
---
http://www.grobmeier.de
@grobmeier
GPG: 0xA5CC90DB
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Moving to Git...
Posted by Jörg Schaible <jo...@gmx.de>.
Hi James,
James Carman wrote:
> Sorry, didn't understand your question. The Apache Camel team uses
> Git and they release maintenance versions all the time (I believe
> about 3 or 4 at a time sometimes when a bug fix gets merged down).
> Here's a list of the current projects using Git:
>
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=camel.git;a=heads
OK, this is an evidence that they are able to release from branch and they
use the Maven release plugin. If they can manage, so can we.
- Jörg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Moving to Git...
Posted by James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>.
Sorry, didn't understand your question. The Apache Camel team uses
Git and they release maintenance versions all the time (I believe
about 3 or 4 at a time sometimes when a bug fix gets merged down).
Here's a list of the current projects using Git:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 11:12 AM, James Carman
<ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:
> How is that any different than SVN? We have to release from branches
> with SVN too. We don't copy our "maintenance" branches to trunk in
> order to do releases.
>
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 11:09 AM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Jörg Schaible
>> <Jo...@scalaris.com> wrote:
>>> James Carman wrote:
>>>
>>>> All,
>>>>
>>>> We have had some great discussions about moving our SCM to Git. I
>>>> think it's time to put it to a vote. So, here we go:
>>>>
>>>> +1 - yes, move to Git
>>>> -1 - no, do not move to Git
>>>>
>>>> The vote will be left open for 72 hours. Go!
>>>>
>>>> James
>>>
>>>
>>> -1
>>>
>>> We have to ensure before that our tooling works with Git and that we stay
>>> compliant to ASF rules:
>>>
>>> - Release from a Git branch (if we start increasing major versions more
>>> frequently, we will have soon the requirement for maintenance releases).
>>> AFAICS there are still problems for Maven.
>>
>> Great point. Sounds like someone needs to experiment and show that it
>> can be done. Since James started the vote,, perhaps he'd care to pick
>> one Commons component and try to release through git...
>>
>> Gary
>>
>>> - Someone raised the question about the shared stuff like site ... is that
>>> solved?
>>> - Which Git server has the master? At Apache? At Github? If Github, legal
>>> consequences? If Apache, automated sync with Github?
>>>
>>> No objection on the switch in general though.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Jörg
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition
>> Spring Batch in Action
>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
>> Home: http://garygregory.com/
>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Moving to Git...
Posted by James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>.
How is that any different than SVN? We have to release from branches
with SVN too. We don't copy our "maintenance" branches to trunk in
order to do releases.
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 11:09 AM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Jörg Schaible
> <Jo...@scalaris.com> wrote:
>> James Carman wrote:
>>
>>> All,
>>>
>>> We have had some great discussions about moving our SCM to Git. I
>>> think it's time to put it to a vote. So, here we go:
>>>
>>> +1 - yes, move to Git
>>> -1 - no, do not move to Git
>>>
>>> The vote will be left open for 72 hours. Go!
>>>
>>> James
>>
>>
>> -1
>>
>> We have to ensure before that our tooling works with Git and that we stay
>> compliant to ASF rules:
>>
>> - Release from a Git branch (if we start increasing major versions more
>> frequently, we will have soon the requirement for maintenance releases).
>> AFAICS there are still problems for Maven.
>
> Great point. Sounds like someone needs to experiment and show that it
> can be done. Since James started the vote,, perhaps he'd care to pick
> one Commons component and try to release through git...
>
> Gary
>
>> - Someone raised the question about the shared stuff like site ... is that
>> solved?
>> - Which Git server has the master? At Apache? At Github? If Github, legal
>> consequences? If Apache, automated sync with Github?
>>
>> No objection on the switch in general though.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Jörg
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
> JUnit in Action, Second Edition
> Spring Batch in Action
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Moving to Git...
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Jörg Schaible
<Jo...@scalaris.com> wrote:
> James Carman wrote:
>
>> All,
>>
>> We have had some great discussions about moving our SCM to Git. I
>> think it's time to put it to a vote. So, here we go:
>>
>> +1 - yes, move to Git
>> -1 - no, do not move to Git
>>
>> The vote will be left open for 72 hours. Go!
>>
>> James
>
>
> -1
>
> We have to ensure before that our tooling works with Git and that we stay
> compliant to ASF rules:
>
> - Release from a Git branch (if we start increasing major versions more
> frequently, we will have soon the requirement for maintenance releases).
> AFAICS there are still problems for Maven.
Great point. Sounds like someone needs to experiment and show that it
can be done. Since James started the vote,, perhaps he'd care to pick
one Commons component and try to release through git...
Gary
> - Someone raised the question about the shared stuff like site ... is that
> solved?
> - Which Git server has the master? At Apache? At Github? If Github, legal
> consequences? If Apache, automated sync with Github?
>
> No objection on the switch in general though.
>
> Cheers,
> Jörg
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
--
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
JUnit in Action, Second Edition
Spring Batch in Action
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Moving to Git...
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Jörg Schaible
<Jo...@scalaris.com> wrote:
> James Carman wrote:
>
>> All,
>>
>> We have had some great discussions about moving our SCM to Git. I
>> think it's time to put it to a vote. So, here we go:
>>
>> +1 - yes, move to Git
>> -1 - no, do not move to Git
>>
>> The vote will be left open for 72 hours. Go!
>>
>> James
>
>
> -1
>
> We have to ensure before that our tooling works with Git and that we stay
> compliant to ASF rules:
>
> - Release from a Git branch (if we start increasing major versions more
> frequently, we will have soon the requirement for maintenance releases).
> AFAICS there are still problems for Maven.
> - Someone raised the question about the shared stuff like site ... is that
> solved?
> - Which Git server has the master? At Apache?
Of course at Apache. Why anywhere else? There are plenty of projects
already at git.apache.org that are mirrored to GitHub. There is an
established precedent. It looks Commons projects are mirrored from SVN
to our Git server already.
Gary
At Github? If Github, legal
> consequences? If Apache, automated sync with Github?
>
> No objection on the switch in general though.
>
> Cheers,
> Jörg
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
--
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
JUnit in Action, Second Edition
Spring Batch in Action
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Moving to Git...
Posted by Jörg Schaible <Jo...@scalaris.com>.
James Carman wrote:
> All,
>
> We have had some great discussions about moving our SCM to Git. I
> think it's time to put it to a vote. So, here we go:
>
> +1 - yes, move to Git
> -1 - no, do not move to Git
>
> The vote will be left open for 72 hours. Go!
>
> James
-1
We have to ensure before that our tooling works with Git and that we stay
compliant to ASF rules:
- Release from a Git branch (if we start increasing major versions more
frequently, we will have soon the requirement for maintenance releases).
AFAICS there are still problems for Maven.
- Someone raised the question about the shared stuff like site ... is that
solved?
- Which Git server has the master? At Apache? At Github? If Github, legal
consequences? If Apache, automated sync with Github?
No objection on the switch in general though.
Cheers,
Jörg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Moving to Git...
Posted by Emmanuel Bourg <eb...@apache.org>.
Le 10/10/2013 16:49, James Carman a écrit :
> I'm going to start another thread. For me, in gmail, this got
> combined with the [DISCUSS] thread and I don't want votes to get lost.
> Consider this [VOTE] canceled! Romain, please vote again in the
> other thread. Sorry, folks.
At least in Thunderbird the vote thread is distinct.
Emmanuel Bourg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Moving to Git...
Posted by James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>.
I'm going to start another thread. For me, in gmail, this got
combined with the [DISCUSS] thread and I don't want votes to get lost.
Consider this [VOTE] canceled! Romain, please vote again in the
other thread. Sorry, folks.
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 10:41 AM, James Carman
<ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:
> All,
>
> We have had some great discussions about moving our SCM to Git. I
> think it's time to put it to a vote. So, here we go:
>
> +1 - yes, move to Git
> -1 - no, do not move to Git
>
> The vote will be left open for 72 hours. Go!
>
> James
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Moving to Git...
Posted by Emmanuel Bourg <eb...@apache.org>.
-0
I'm fine with SVN and the time sucked by the migration could be better
spent coding the components (or reviewing the pending release candidates
*cough*). That said, Git is now well supported by the tools I use, so
I'm not opposed to the transition.
Emmanuel Bourg
Le 10/10/2013 16:41, James Carman a écrit :
> All,
>
> We have had some great discussions about moving our SCM to Git. I
> think it's time to put it to a vote. So, here we go:
>
> +1 - yes, move to Git
> -1 - no, do not move to Git
>
> The vote will be left open for 72 hours. Go!
>
> James
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
Re: [VOTE] Moving to Git...
Posted by James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>.
An interesting bit of stats for the Apache Camel project. Here's
their pull request history:
Jan 3
Feb 4
Mar 6
Apr 1
May 2
Jun 4
Jul 10
Aug 6
Sep 4
They switched their repository over to Git in May. So, for the 4
months before May, they had a total of 14 pull requests. For the 4
months after May, they've had 24. Definitely not scientific, but it's
interesting.
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 1:28 PM, Bruno P. Kinoshita
<br...@yahoo.com.br> wrote:
> +1
>
> Bruno P. Kinoshita
> http://kinoshita.eti.br
> http://tupilabs.com
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>
>> To: Commons Developers List <de...@commons.apache.org>
>> Cc:
>> Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 11:41 AM
>> Subject: [VOTE] Moving to Git...
>>
>> All,
>>
>> We have had some great discussions about moving our SCM to Git. I
>> think it's time to put it to a vote. So, here we go:
>>
>> +1 - yes, move to Git
>> -1 - no, do not move to Git
>>
>> The vote will be left open for 72 hours. Go!
>>
>> James
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Moving to Git...
Posted by "Bruno P. Kinoshita" <br...@yahoo.com.br>.
+1
Bruno P. Kinoshita
http://kinoshita.eti.br
http://tupilabs.com
----- Original Message -----
> From: James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>
> To: Commons Developers List <de...@commons.apache.org>
> Cc:
> Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 11:41 AM
> Subject: [VOTE] Moving to Git...
>
> All,
>
> We have had some great discussions about moving our SCM to Git. I
> think it's time to put it to a vote. So, here we go:
>
> +1 - yes, move to Git
> -1 - no, do not move to Git
>
> The vote will be left open for 72 hours. Go!
>
> James
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Moving to Git...
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
+1
*Romain Manni-Bucau*
*Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
*Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
*LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
*Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
2013/10/10 James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>
> All,
>
> We have had some great discussions about moving our SCM to Git. I
> think it's time to put it to a vote. So, here we go:
>
> +1 - yes, move to Git
> -1 - no, do not move to Git
>
> The vote will be left open for 72 hours. Go!
>
> James
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Moving to Git...
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
@Gilles: that's right (and I'm part of people thinking this is not the main
issue) but everybody seems happy to use git instead of svn so let's go
*Romain Manni-Bucau*
*Twitter: @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>*
*Blog: **http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/*<http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com/>
*LinkedIn: **http://fr.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau*
*Github: https://github.com/rmannibucau*
2013/10/10 Gilles <gi...@harfang.homelinux.org>
> On Thu, 10 Oct 2013 10:41:11 -0400, James Carman wrote:
>
>> All,
>>
>> We have had some great discussions about moving our SCM to Git. I
>> think it's time to put it to a vote. So, here we go:
>>
>> +1 - yes, move to Git
>> -1 - no, do not move to Git
>>
>
> -1
>
> Some people have indicated that this move might not address the problem
> it is supposed to. No conclusive answer has been provided.
>
>
> Regards,
> Gilles
>
>
>
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.**apache.org<de...@commons.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Moving to Git...
Posted by James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>.
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 6:13 PM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> I disagree. We don't have releases because of an overly complex release
> process. Figuring out how to do a Pool 2 release is on my TODO list.
> Having seen the pain others new to the Commons release process have gone
> though, I'm not looking forward to it at all.
>
Well, we can agree to disagree. And, that's okay. That's what
community is all about.
I do appreciate your feelings about the release process. I've done
releases before and it's VERY painful. On my home setup, I use
jenkins to cut releases on my pet projects. All I do is fill out what
version number I want to release and it does the rest (after some
initial setup of course). I wish we had something so simple here at
Commons, maybe not the exact same thing, but something as simple.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Moving to Git...
Posted by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com>.
> On Oct 10, 2013, at 11:55 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Can a release guy detail what is painful and why we cant release with a
> script?
That is what I have always ended up doing. The problems start when we try to get everything to work for all components automagically from maven and nexus. Some people use windows so shell scripts to simplify things can't work for everyone. Different components also have slightly different needs. Add in lots of RMs releasing infrequently and it ends up hard to standardize. I would be +1 for component-level scripts / rm readmes so new RMs could step in easily. Gilles did that for [math] a while back and it was very helpful. I have also been +1 for a while for dumping commons parent.
Phil
> Git or svn are scriptable to be auto so the scm is clearly not the
> release issue (maybe not fashion but not blocking)
> Le 11 oct. 2013 01:24, "Gary Gregory" <ga...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
>> On Oct 10, 2013, at 18:13, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>>> On 10/10/2013 23:05, James Carman wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I would suggest that a lack of releases is a much greater barrier.
>> Folks
>>>>> who contribute patches do so because they want to see them in a
>> release.
>>>>> If there are no releases (and looking back for the past 6 months there
>>>>> have been very few releases considering the number of components in
>>>>> commons) then, frankly, a move to git is largely irrelevant. What it
>>>>> will do little is distract what little effort there is going into
>>>>> releases making the overall problem worse not better.
>>>>
>>>> It's a catch-22. You don't have releases because you don't have
>>>> contributors.
>>>
>>> I disagree. We don't have releases because of an overly complex release
>>> process.
>>
>>
>> +1. It's a pain for sure. But there no simple solution aside from
>> reducing what we deliver and where :(
>>
>> Gary
>>> Figuring out how to do a Pool 2 release is on my TODO list.
>>> Having seen the pain others new to the Commons release process have gone
>>> though, I'm not looking forward to it at all.
>>>
>>> Mark
>>>
>>>> And, you don't have contributors because you don't have
>>>> releases. I agree we need to get busy cranking out some code to let
>>>> folks know we're not dead (yet). The only way I see us getting more
>>>> code going is to get new people and I honestly believe that using a
>>>> tool like Git will help us do that.
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Moving to Git...
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
I dont think it vetoes it, it is just not linked
Le 11 oct. 2013 07:47, "Benedikt Ritter" <be...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> I don't understand why "SCM isn't the biggest problem" causes people to
> veto this change.
>
> Send from my mobile device
>
> > Am 11.10.2013 um 06:55 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibucau@gmail.com
> >:
> >
> > Can a release guy detail what is painful and why we cant release with a
> > script? Git or svn are scriptable to be auto so the scm is clearly not
> the
> > release issue (maybe not fashion but not blocking)
> > Le 11 oct. 2013 01:24, "Gary Gregory" <ga...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> >
> >> On Oct 10, 2013, at 18:13, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>>> On 10/10/2013 23:05, James Carman wrote:
> >>>>> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I would suggest that a lack of releases is a much greater barrier.
> >> Folks
> >>>>> who contribute patches do so because they want to see them in a
> >> release.
> >>>>> If there are no releases (and looking back for the past 6 months
> there
> >>>>> have been very few releases considering the number of components in
> >>>>> commons) then, frankly, a move to git is largely irrelevant. What it
> >>>>> will do little is distract what little effort there is going into
> >>>>> releases making the overall problem worse not better.
> >>>>
> >>>> It's a catch-22. You don't have releases because you don't have
> >>>> contributors.
> >>>
> >>> I disagree. We don't have releases because of an overly complex release
> >>> process.
> >>
> >>
> >> +1. It's a pain for sure. But there no simple solution aside from
> >> reducing what we deliver and where :(
> >>
> >> Gary
> >>> Figuring out how to do a Pool 2 release is on my TODO list.
> >>> Having seen the pain others new to the Commons release process have
> gone
> >>> though, I'm not looking forward to it at all.
> >>>
> >>> Mark
> >>>
> >>>> And, you don't have contributors because you don't have
> >>>> releases. I agree we need to get busy cranking out some code to let
> >>>> folks know we're not dead (yet). The only way I see us getting more
> >>>> code going is to get new people and I honestly believe that using a
> >>>> tool like Git will help us do that.
> >>>>
> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
> >>
> >>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Moving to Git...
Posted by Torsten Curdt <tc...@vafer.org>.
big +1 for the the move from me (I guess that does not come as a surprise)
"SCM isn't the biggest problem" is certainly true but given my experience I
am inclined to say it will help.
But with so many hesitant people I think we need a good plan on how it will
look like.
We especially need to check out the "how to handle pull requests" story
from all angles.
cheers,
Torsten
On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 8:31 AM, Jörg Schaible
<Jo...@scalaris.com>wrote:
> Benedikt Ritter wrote:
>
> > I don't understand why "SCM isn't the biggest problem" causes people to
> > veto this change.
>
> It's not a veto, it's a normal majority decision.
>
> - Jörg
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Moving to Git...
Posted by Jörg Schaible <Jo...@scalaris.com>.
Benedikt Ritter wrote:
> I don't understand why "SCM isn't the biggest problem" causes people to
> veto this change.
It's not a veto, it's a normal majority decision.
- Jörg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Moving to Git...
Posted by Torsten Curdt <tc...@vafer.org>.
> Maybe for tiny fixes it's that easy - for longer contribution where you
>> follow development it's not.
>>
>
> How often does that happen (within Commons)?
>
Not often enough because then we would have more people working on commons
;)
> How often will a new contributor embark in a long rewrite? [And if he
> does, how many more newbie "mistakes" will the reviewers need to signal
> and correct?]
>
It's now about a re-write. It's about maintaining local changes until they
go upstream.
What do you do? Maintain a diff file until then?
In Commons Math, I don't remember an issue because of using Subversion.
> [And I don't deny that Git is very probably better. But do we really
> need the power? If not, I'd prefer not to be _obliged_ to learn it right
> now in order to be able to work on CM, just because of a hypothetical
> miraculous contributor that would be put off by Subversion.]
>
"learn" might be a bit of an overstatement ;)
If you don't do fancy things there are maybe 6 commands you could write
down.
For someone working on Commons Math I am sure it should not take that much
time get this ;)
> Anyway - I'll try not to get sucked into this discussion again.
>> Just wanted to state that I think it could be a good thing.
>>
>
> A good thing for those who know how to use Git. Not so good for me.
>
See above. I bet you are smarter than you are lazy to make it a non-issue :)
cheers,
Torsten
Re: [DISCUSS] Moving to Git...
Posted by Gilles <gi...@harfang.homelinux.org>.
On Fri, 11 Oct 2013 13:37:03 +0200, Torsten Curdt wrote:
>> There is no proof that more contributors will suddenly appear just
>> because the tool has changed.
>>
>
> The numbers James brought tell a different story.
> Maybe just a very specific indicator and not scientific - but so is
> your
> claim that it does not change anything at all.
I did not claim anything.
>> As people noted, a contributor can fairly easily do
>> $ svn co ...
>> ... modify trunk ...
>> $ svn diff > issue.patch
>>
>> I can hardly see how this 2-steps procedure can be a barrier to new
>> bringing new contributions.
>>
>
> Maybe for tiny fixes it's that easy - for longer contribution where
> you
> follow development it's not.
How often does that happen (within Commons)?
How often will a new contributor embark in a long rewrite? [And if he
does, how many more newbie "mistakes" will the reviewers need to signal
and correct?]
In Commons Math, I don't remember an issue because of using Subversion.
[And I don't deny that Git is very probably better. But do we really
need the power? If not, I'd prefer not to be _obliged_ to learn it
right
now in order to be able to work on CM, just because of a hypothetical
miraculous contributor that would be put off by Subversion.]
> Anyway - I'll try not to get sucked into this discussion again.
> Just wanted to state that I think it could be a good thing.
A good thing for those who know how to use Git. Not so good for me.
If the most active contributors to a given component can agree to
switch,
that's fine; but a majority of people that do not contribute to a given
component should not impose a change there (IMHO).
Regards,
Gilles
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Moving to Git...
Posted by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com>.
> On Oct 11, 2013, at 8:23 AM, James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 9:00 AM, Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Question for James - how many new committers did they get? Random drive by pull requests won't help us. We already get more patches than we can evaluate and apply in a timely fashion. The key question is will the git move net us new committers. I suspect the answer is yes but it would be great to hear from others that is the case.
>
> I don't know, but I'll see if I can come up with the numbers.
>
> One thing to keep in mind with those numbers is that Apache Camel is a
> lot less "approachable" than most of the stuff here at Commons. Our
> projects, for the most part, are made up of common little bits of code
> that most folks have either written or thought about how to write on
> their projects (thinking of stuff like StringUtils and the like).
> Camel's code, when you start digging into it, is very difficult to try
> to understand (not saying it's poorly written or anything; it's just a
> tougher problem space).
Definitely relevant for math, pool, DBCP which are getting better but still have an "approachability" problem.
Phil
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Moving to Git...
Posted by James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>.
On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 9:00 AM, Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Question for James - how many new committers did they get? Random drive by pull requests won't help us. We already get more patches than we can evaluate and apply in a timely fashion. The key question is will the git move net us new committers. I suspect the answer is yes but it would be great to hear from others that is the case.
>
I don't know, but I'll see if I can come up with the numbers.
One thing to keep in mind with those numbers is that Apache Camel is a
lot less "approachable" than most of the stuff here at Commons. Our
projects, for the most part, are made up of common little bits of code
that most folks have either written or thought about how to write on
their projects (thinking of stuff like StringUtils and the like).
Camel's code, when you start digging into it, is very difficult to try
to understand (not saying it's poorly written or anything; it's just a
tougher problem space).
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Moving to Git...
Posted by Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com>.
On Oct 11, 2013, at 6:37 AM, Torsten Curdt <tc...@vafer.org> wrote:
>> There is no proof that more contributors will suddenly appear just
>> because the tool has changed.
>
> The numbers James brought tell a different story.
> Maybe just a very specific indicator and not scientific - but so is your
> claim that it does not change anything at all.
>
Question for James - how many new committers did they get? Random drive by pull requests won't help us. We already get more patches than we can evaluate and apply in a timely fashion. The key question is will the git move net us new committers. I suspect the answer is yes but it would be great to hear from others that is the case.
Phil
>
>
>> As people noted, a contributor can fairly easily do
>> $ svn co ...
>> ... modify trunk ...
>> $ svn diff > issue.patch
>>
>> I can hardly see how this 2-steps procedure can be a barrier to new
>> bringing new contributions.
>
> Maybe for tiny fixes it's that easy - for longer contribution where you
> follow development it's not.
>
> Anyway - I'll try not to get sucked into this discussion again.
> Just wanted to state that I think it could be a good thing.
>
> cheers,
> Torsten
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Moving to Git...
Posted by Torsten Curdt <tc...@vafer.org>.
> There is no proof that more contributors will suddenly appear just
> because the tool has changed.
>
The numbers James brought tell a different story.
Maybe just a very specific indicator and not scientific - but so is your
claim that it does not change anything at all.
> As people noted, a contributor can fairly easily do
> $ svn co ...
> ... modify trunk ...
> $ svn diff > issue.patch
>
> I can hardly see how this 2-steps procedure can be a barrier to new
> bringing new contributions.
>
Maybe for tiny fixes it's that easy - for longer contribution where you
follow development it's not.
Anyway - I'll try not to get sucked into this discussion again.
Just wanted to state that I think it could be a good thing.
cheers,
Torsten
Re: [DISCUSS] Moving to Git...
Posted by Gilles <gi...@harfang.homelinux.org>.
On Fri, 11 Oct 2013 07:47:05 +0200, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
> I don't understand why "SCM isn't the biggest problem" causes people
> to veto this change.
There is no proof that more contributors will suddenly appear just
because the tool has changed.
As people noted, a contributor can fairly easily do
$ svn co ...
... modify trunk ...
$ svn diff > issue.patch
I can hardly see how this 2-steps procedure can be a barrier to new
bringing new contributions.
So changing the tool is a matter of taste (and I understand that).
Perhaps the choice can be done on a per-project basis?
Regards,
Gilles
> [...]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Moving to Git...
Posted by Benedikt Ritter <be...@gmail.com>.
I don't understand why "SCM isn't the biggest problem" causes people to veto this change.
Send from my mobile device
> Am 11.10.2013 um 06:55 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>:
>
> Can a release guy detail what is painful and why we cant release with a
> script? Git or svn are scriptable to be auto so the scm is clearly not the
> release issue (maybe not fashion but not blocking)
> Le 11 oct. 2013 01:24, "Gary Gregory" <ga...@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
>> On Oct 10, 2013, at 18:13, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>>> On 10/10/2013 23:05, James Carman wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I would suggest that a lack of releases is a much greater barrier.
>> Folks
>>>>> who contribute patches do so because they want to see them in a
>> release.
>>>>> If there are no releases (and looking back for the past 6 months there
>>>>> have been very few releases considering the number of components in
>>>>> commons) then, frankly, a move to git is largely irrelevant. What it
>>>>> will do little is distract what little effort there is going into
>>>>> releases making the overall problem worse not better.
>>>>
>>>> It's a catch-22. You don't have releases because you don't have
>>>> contributors.
>>>
>>> I disagree. We don't have releases because of an overly complex release
>>> process.
>>
>>
>> +1. It's a pain for sure. But there no simple solution aside from
>> reducing what we deliver and where :(
>>
>> Gary
>>> Figuring out how to do a Pool 2 release is on my TODO list.
>>> Having seen the pain others new to the Commons release process have gone
>>> though, I'm not looking forward to it at all.
>>>
>>> Mark
>>>
>>>> And, you don't have contributors because you don't have
>>>> releases. I agree we need to get busy cranking out some code to let
>>>> folks know we're not dead (yet). The only way I see us getting more
>>>> code going is to get new people and I honestly believe that using a
>>>> tool like Git will help us do that.
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Moving to Git...
Posted by Romain Manni-Bucau <rm...@gmail.com>.
Can a release guy detail what is painful and why we cant release with a
script? Git or svn are scriptable to be auto so the scm is clearly not the
release issue (maybe not fashion but not blocking)
Le 11 oct. 2013 01:24, "Gary Gregory" <ga...@gmail.com> a écrit :
> On Oct 10, 2013, at 18:13, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > On 10/10/2013 23:05, James Carman wrote:
> >> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I would suggest that a lack of releases is a much greater barrier.
> Folks
> >>> who contribute patches do so because they want to see them in a
> release.
> >>> If there are no releases (and looking back for the past 6 months there
> >>> have been very few releases considering the number of components in
> >>> commons) then, frankly, a move to git is largely irrelevant. What it
> >>> will do little is distract what little effort there is going into
> >>> releases making the overall problem worse not better.
> >>>
> >>
> >> It's a catch-22. You don't have releases because you don't have
> >> contributors.
> >
> > I disagree. We don't have releases because of an overly complex release
> > process.
>
>
> +1. It's a pain for sure. But there no simple solution aside from
> reducing what we deliver and where :(
>
> Gary
> > Figuring out how to do a Pool 2 release is on my TODO list.
> > Having seen the pain others new to the Commons release process have gone
> > though, I'm not looking forward to it at all.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> >> And, you don't have contributors because you don't have
> >> releases. I agree we need to get busy cranking out some code to let
> >> folks know we're not dead (yet). The only way I see us getting more
> >> code going is to get new people and I honestly believe that using a
> >> tool like Git will help us do that.
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
> >>
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Moving to Git...
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
On Oct 10, 2013, at 18:13, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 10/10/2013 23:05, James Carman wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> I would suggest that a lack of releases is a much greater barrier. Folks
>>> who contribute patches do so because they want to see them in a release.
>>> If there are no releases (and looking back for the past 6 months there
>>> have been very few releases considering the number of components in
>>> commons) then, frankly, a move to git is largely irrelevant. What it
>>> will do little is distract what little effort there is going into
>>> releases making the overall problem worse not better.
>>>
>>
>> It's a catch-22. You don't have releases because you don't have
>> contributors.
>
> I disagree. We don't have releases because of an overly complex release
> process.
+1. It's a pain for sure. But there no simple solution aside from
reducing what we deliver and where :(
Gary
> Figuring out how to do a Pool 2 release is on my TODO list.
> Having seen the pain others new to the Commons release process have gone
> though, I'm not looking forward to it at all.
>
> Mark
>
>> And, you don't have contributors because you don't have
>> releases. I agree we need to get busy cranking out some code to let
>> folks know we're not dead (yet). The only way I see us getting more
>> code going is to get new people and I honestly believe that using a
>> tool like Git will help us do that.
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Moving to Git...
Posted by Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org>.
On 10/10/2013 23:05, James Carman wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> I would suggest that a lack of releases is a much greater barrier. Folks
>> who contribute patches do so because they want to see them in a release.
>> If there are no releases (and looking back for the past 6 months there
>> have been very few releases considering the number of components in
>> commons) then, frankly, a move to git is largely irrelevant. What it
>> will do little is distract what little effort there is going into
>> releases making the overall problem worse not better.
>>
>
> It's a catch-22. You don't have releases because you don't have
> contributors.
I disagree. We don't have releases because of an overly complex release
process. Figuring out how to do a Pool 2 release is on my TODO list.
Having seen the pain others new to the Commons release process have gone
though, I'm not looking forward to it at all.
Mark
> And, you don't have contributors because you don't have
> releases. I agree we need to get busy cranking out some code to let
> folks know we're not dead (yet). The only way I see us getting more
> code going is to get new people and I honestly believe that using a
> tool like Git will help us do that.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Moving to Git...
Posted by James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>.
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> I would suggest that a lack of releases is a much greater barrier. Folks
> who contribute patches do so because they want to see them in a release.
> If there are no releases (and looking back for the past 6 months there
> have been very few releases considering the number of components in
> commons) then, frankly, a move to git is largely irrelevant. What it
> will do little is distract what little effort there is going into
> releases making the overall problem worse not better.
>
It's a catch-22. You don't have releases because you don't have
contributors. And, you don't have contributors because you don't have
releases. I agree we need to get busy cranking out some code to let
folks know we're not dead (yet). The only way I see us getting more
code going is to get new people and I honestly believe that using a
tool like Git will help us do that.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Moving to Git...
Posted by Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org>.
On 10/10/2013 22:41, James Carman wrote:
> And how did we establish that git will not address those concerns?
It has not been established that the choice of git vs. svn is the
biggest blocker to attracting attention and contributors.
I would suggest that a lack of releases is a much greater barrier. Folks
who contribute patches do so because they want to see them in a release.
If there are no releases (and looking back for the past 6 months there
have been very few releases considering the number of components in
commons) then, frankly, a move to git is largely irrelevant. What it
will do little is distract what little effort there is going into
releases making the overall problem worse not better.
Mark
>
> On Thursday, October 10, 2013, Gilles wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 10 Oct 2013 11:58:58 -0400, James Carman wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Gilles
>>> <gi...@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> -1
>>>>
>>>> Some people have indicated that this move might not address the problem
>>>> it is supposed to. No conclusive answer has been provided.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> What problem is that exactly? Perhaps that's not well understood?
>>>
>>>
>> Attracting attention and contributors.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Gilles
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Moving to Git...
Posted by James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>.
And how did we establish that git will not address those concerns?
On Thursday, October 10, 2013, Gilles wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Oct 2013 11:58:58 -0400, James Carman wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Gilles
>> <gi...@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote:
>>
>>> -1
>>>
>>> Some people have indicated that this move might not address the problem
>>> it is supposed to. No conclusive answer has been provided.
>>>
>>>
>> What problem is that exactly? Perhaps that's not well understood?
>>
>>
> Attracting attention and contributors.
>
> Regards,
> Gilles
>
>
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Moving to Git...
Posted by Gilles <gi...@harfang.homelinux.org>.
On Thu, 10 Oct 2013 11:58:58 -0400, James Carman wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Gilles
> <gi...@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote:
>> -1
>>
>> Some people have indicated that this move might not address the
>> problem
>> it is supposed to. No conclusive answer has been provided.
>>
>
> What problem is that exactly? Perhaps that's not well understood?
>
Attracting attention and contributors.
Regards,
Gilles
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Moving to Git...
Posted by James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>.
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 10:50 AM, Gilles <gi...@harfang.homelinux.org> wrote:
> -1
>
> Some people have indicated that this move might not address the problem
> it is supposed to. No conclusive answer has been provided.
>
What problem is that exactly? Perhaps that's not well understood?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Moving to Git...
Posted by Gilles <gi...@harfang.homelinux.org>.
On Thu, 10 Oct 2013 10:41:11 -0400, James Carman wrote:
> All,
>
> We have had some great discussions about moving our SCM to Git. I
> think it's time to put it to a vote. So, here we go:
>
> +1 - yes, move to Git
> -1 - no, do not move to Git
-1
Some people have indicated that this move might not address the problem
it is supposed to. No conclusive answer has been provided.
Regards,
Gilles
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Moving to Git...
Posted by Christian Grobmeier <gr...@gmail.com>.
On 11 Oct 2013, at 15:28, Ted Dunning wrote:
> I hate myself a bit for jumping in here, but as much as I prefer git,
> I
> really don't think that changing will make that much difference.
Well, obviously I think it matters (see my other threads).
> The problem with commons is that people have much more energy for
> interminable conversations about things that don't much matter (like
> this
> thread).
But this is a [VOTE] thread and not meant for discussion ;-)
> People who do things don't generally want to talk them to death. If
> half
> the energy that goes into long debates went into coding for commons
> there
> wouldn't be a problem. Long discussions about whether discussions
> about
> things that might make coding easier are even worse than a long
> discussions
> so I am now part of the problem.
>
> Perhaps a good rule of thumb would be no more than 5 email messages
> about
> non-code issues per patch that you have posted to a commons component.
> I
> am probably at or beyond that limit so I will shut up and not respond
> further.
I don't see the Commons discussions as toxic in a way and can't agree
to a "mail / patch" ratio.
>
> Given that the open source community has gradually been re-inventing
> aspects of scientific society (salons = meetups, RS = ASF and so on)
> maybe
> it is time to invent something like peer review to moderate the long
> conversations.
Maybe you should just say -1 or whatever else you think and we tally the
votes afterwards.
Cheers
Christian
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 6:01 AM, Christian Grobmeier
> <gr...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> I consider this move to happen step by step and see only little risk
>> if we
>> start with a single component first.
>> As the half of the world works with git meanwhile I see less risk in
>> general too.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10 Oct 2013, at 16:41, James Carman wrote:
>>
>> All,
>>>
>>> We have had some great discussions about moving our SCM to Git. I
>>> think it's time to put it to a vote. So, here we go:
>>>
>>> +1 - yes, move to Git
>>> -1 - no, do not move to Git
>>>
>>> The vote will be left open for 72 hours. Go!
>>>
>>> James
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>> dev-unsubscribe@commons.**apache.org<de...@commons.apache.org>
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>> http://www.grobmeier.de
>> @grobmeier
>> GPG: 0xA5CC90DB
>>
>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> dev-unsubscribe@commons.**apache.org<de...@commons.apache.org>
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>>
---
http://www.grobmeier.de
@grobmeier
GPG: 0xA5CC90DB
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Moving to Git...
Posted by Ted Dunning <te...@gmail.com>.
I hate myself a bit for jumping in here, but as much as I prefer git, I
really don't think that changing will make that much difference.
The problem with commons is that people have much more energy for
interminable conversations about things that don't much matter (like this
thread).
People who do things don't generally want to talk them to death. If half
the energy that goes into long debates went into coding for commons there
wouldn't be a problem. Long discussions about whether discussions about
things that might make coding easier are even worse than a long discussions
so I am now part of the problem.
Perhaps a good rule of thumb would be no more than 5 email messages about
non-code issues per patch that you have posted to a commons component. I
am probably at or beyond that limit so I will shut up and not respond
further.
Given that the open source community has gradually been re-inventing
aspects of scientific society (salons = meetups, RS = ASF and so on) maybe
it is time to invent something like peer review to moderate the long
conversations.
On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 6:01 AM, Christian Grobmeier <gr...@gmail.com>wrote:
> +1
>
> I consider this move to happen step by step and see only little risk if we
> start with a single component first.
> As the half of the world works with git meanwhile I see less risk in
> general too.
>
>
>
> On 10 Oct 2013, at 16:41, James Carman wrote:
>
> All,
>>
>> We have had some great discussions about moving our SCM to Git. I
>> think it's time to put it to a vote. So, here we go:
>>
>> +1 - yes, move to Git
>> -1 - no, do not move to Git
>>
>> The vote will be left open for 72 hours. Go!
>>
>> James
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.**apache.org<de...@commons.apache.org>
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>
>
> ---
> http://www.grobmeier.de
> @grobmeier
> GPG: 0xA5CC90DB
>
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.**apache.org<de...@commons.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Moving to Git...
Posted by Christian Grobmeier <gr...@gmail.com>.
+1
I consider this move to happen step by step and see only little risk if
we start with a single component first.
As the half of the world works with git meanwhile I see less risk in
general too.
On 10 Oct 2013, at 16:41, James Carman wrote:
> All,
>
> We have had some great discussions about moving our SCM to Git. I
> think it's time to put it to a vote. So, here we go:
>
> +1 - yes, move to Git
> -1 - no, do not move to Git
>
> The vote will be left open for 72 hours. Go!
>
> James
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
---
http://www.grobmeier.de
@grobmeier
GPG: 0xA5CC90DB
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Moving to Git...
Posted by James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>.
Gary,
I actually did. You have to show details in Gmail to see it. For
some reason it collapsed the two threads. Sorry for the confusion.
There's a new thread already started.
Thanks,
James
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 10:57 AM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Could you please restart the thread with a [VOTE] in the subject?
>
> Gary
>
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 10:41 AM, James Carman
> <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:
>> All,
>>
>> We have had some great discussions about moving our SCM to Git. I
>> think it's time to put it to a vote. So, here we go:
>>
>> +1 - yes, move to Git
>> -1 - no, do not move to Git
>>
>> The vote will be left open for 72 hours. Go!
>>
>> James
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
> E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
> JUnit in Action, Second Edition
> Spring Batch in Action
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Moving to Git...
Posted by Emmanuel Bourg <eb...@apache.org>.
Le 10/10/2013 16:57, Gary Gregory a écrit :
> Could you please restart the thread with a [VOTE] in the subject?
There is one though:
http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@commons.apache.org/msg40574.html
Emmanuel Bourg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Moving to Git...
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
Could you please restart the thread with a [VOTE] in the subject?
Gary
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 10:41 AM, James Carman
<ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:
> All,
>
> We have had some great discussions about moving our SCM to Git. I
> think it's time to put it to a vote. So, here we go:
>
> +1 - yes, move to Git
> -1 - no, do not move to Git
>
> The vote will be left open for 72 hours. Go!
>
> James
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
--
E-Mail: garydgregory@gmail.com | ggregory@apache.org
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
JUnit in Action, Second Edition
Spring Batch in Action
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Moving to Git...
Posted by James Carman <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>.
Here's my +1 (binding)
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 10:41 AM, James Carman
<ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote:
> All,
>
> We have had some great discussions about moving our SCM to Git. I
> think it's time to put it to a vote. So, here we go:
>
> +1 - yes, move to Git
> -1 - no, do not move to Git
>
> The vote will be left open for 72 hours. Go!
>
> James
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org