You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Peter Kovacs <Pe...@Apache.org> on 2019/07/20 12:16:31 UTC
[discussion] svn migration plan
Hello all,
I had a talk with Gavin today, informing myself about the migration from
SVN to Git. Since we have already a github mirror process we can not use
the self service.
I copied the chat to Cwiki, in order everyone can review what have been
spoken about. [0]
Summary:
We have to open a ticket at infra and order the migration. The migration
in general will consist of the following steps (taken from slack, chat
protocol):
The Infra steps in short
1. Verify Github repos is upto date and correct
2. we mark SVN read only
3. we clone the Github repos into Gitbox
4. we make them both writable
# We can have multiple Repositories.
# Gavin also whish that the depreciated CMS can be shut down in 3 month.
I promised we look into it and try to accomplish in the time. There are
no deadlines yet.
I suggest the following migration Approach:
1) We migrate OpenOffice Code to git
1.1.) OpenOffice main will move into one repository
1.2) OpenOffice ext_source and ext_libraries will be split, and each
dependency gets its own repository.
1.3) extras/l10n will become an own repositry
1.4) test will become an own repository.
1.5) we adjust our build environment to reflect the new structure. I.e.
You need only checkout core and bootstrap can download everything else.
unzip step can be skipped.
2) We migrate CMS to a new solution. We have the option to go for the
alterantive, honestly I would like to migrate to a easy to use sollution
like neo CMS and migrate the mwiki too.
We need to be able to lower the barrier for non tech work where ever we can.
3) PMC folder should be migrated into CWiki.
All the Best
Peter
Older Discussions on the migration on [1],[2]
[0]
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Git+Migration+-+Chat+Protocol+with+Gavin
[1]
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/c972affc61caf4844e7c82f7be9edf10fcd50753884cbaa7399999d1@%3Cdev.openoffice.apache.org%3E
[2]
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4db20d193cc30850e63dc03378a20462d1e5c113e566fffd6c776d1c@%3Cdev.openoffice.apache.org%3E
Re: [discussion] svn migration plan
Posted by Peter Kovacs <Pe...@Apache.org>.
On 20.07.19 16:35, Mechtilde wrote:
> Hello Peter,
>
> thanks for your work
>
> Am 20.07.19 um 16:07 schrieb Damjan Jovanovic:
>> That's a great idea, thank you!
>>
>> 1.1 - 1.5: test/ requires main/ to build, for Ant scripts. main/ requires
>> ext_libraries/ if not more.
>> Why can't we use one repository for everything, like the Github mirror
>> already does?
> I also prefer one repository like Github is.
>
> I already test buildung from Github repo under Debian 9 and it works in
> general. I can't see any difference of the repo.
I do not believe having multiple repos will affect the process much, if
we do this right.
I did the cut at the folders, due the outside representation. It
suggested they were independent. If they are not then lets leave them
with the code.
What I would really like to remove from the Code repo are the external
libraries. They are a binary blob, and we put some patches on top them,
making it hard to really look at the code.
In an own repository these libraries would have a maintainable subset we
can push from and too. -Maybe even backport security Issues if we are
not able to update.
As for Distribution specific versions that do deliver own maintained
builds, you would not use those anyway. i guess at least.
But we can leave the structure as is for now if you feel more save with
that. I think we can split later too (i.e. if we think about splitting
on UNO)
I am not picky on this. It is just a suggestion to improve the situation
for us. And we have the opporunity because we have to think about this
anyhow.
All the best
Peter
>
> Regards
>
> Mechtilde
>> Regards
>> Damjan
>>
>> On Sat, Jul 20, 2019 at 2:16 PM Peter Kovacs <Pe...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>>
>>> I had a talk with Gavin today, informing myself about the migration from
>>> SVN to Git. Since we have already a github mirror process we can not use
>>> the self service.
>>>
>>> I copied the chat to Cwiki, in order everyone can review what have been
>>> spoken about. [0]
>>>
>>> Summary:
>>>
>>> We have to open a ticket at infra and order the migration. The migration
>>> in general will consist of the following steps (taken from slack, chat
>>> protocol):
>>>
>>> The Infra steps in short
>>>
>>> 1. Verify Github repos is upto date and correct
>>> 2. we mark SVN read only
>>> 3. we clone the Github repos into Gitbox
>>> 4. we make them both writable
>>>
>>> # We can have multiple Repositories.
>>>
>>> # Gavin also whish that the depreciated CMS can be shut down in 3 month.
>>> I promised we look into it and try to accomplish in the time. There are
>>> no deadlines yet.
>>>
>>>
>>> I suggest the following migration Approach:
>>>
>>> 1) We migrate OpenOffice Code to git
>>>
>>> 1.1.) OpenOffice main will move into one repository
>>>
>>> 1.2) OpenOffice ext_source and ext_libraries will be split, and each
>>> dependency gets its own repository.
>>>
>>> 1.3) extras/l10n will become an own repositry
>>>
>>> 1.4) test will become an own repository.
>>>
>>> 1.5) we adjust our build environment to reflect the new structure. I.e.
>>> You need only checkout core and bootstrap can download everything else.
>>> unzip step can be skipped.
>>>
>>> 2) We migrate CMS to a new solution. We have the option to go for the
>>> alterantive, honestly I would like to migrate to a easy to use sollution
>>> like neo CMS and migrate the mwiki too.
>>>
>>> We need to be able to lower the barrier for non tech work where ever we
>>> can.
>>>
>>> 3) PMC folder should be migrated into CWiki.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> All the Best
>>>
>>> Peter
>>>
>>> Older Discussions on the migration on [1],[2]
>>>
>>> [0]
>>>
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Git+Migration+-+Chat+Protocol+with+Gavin
>>>
>>> [1]
>>>
>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/c972affc61caf4844e7c82f7be9edf10fcd50753884cbaa7399999d1@%3Cdev.openoffice.apache.org%3E
>>>
>>> [2]
>>>
>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4db20d193cc30850e63dc03378a20462d1e5c113e566fffd6c776d1c@%3Cdev.openoffice.apache.org%3E
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [discussion] svn migration plan
Posted by Mechtilde <oo...@mechtilde.de>.
Hello Peter,
thanks for your work
Am 20.07.19 um 16:07 schrieb Damjan Jovanovic:
> That's a great idea, thank you!
>
> 1.1 - 1.5: test/ requires main/ to build, for Ant scripts. main/ requires
> ext_libraries/ if not more.
> Why can't we use one repository for everything, like the Github mirror
> already does?
I also prefer one repository like Github is.
I already test buildung from Github repo under Debian 9 and it works in
general. I can't see any difference of the repo.
Regards
Mechtilde
>
> Regards
> Damjan
>
> On Sat, Jul 20, 2019 at 2:16 PM Peter Kovacs <Pe...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Hello all,
>>
>>
>> I had a talk with Gavin today, informing myself about the migration from
>> SVN to Git. Since we have already a github mirror process we can not use
>> the self service.
>>
>> I copied the chat to Cwiki, in order everyone can review what have been
>> spoken about. [0]
>>
>> Summary:
>>
>> We have to open a ticket at infra and order the migration. The migration
>> in general will consist of the following steps (taken from slack, chat
>> protocol):
>>
>> The Infra steps in short
>>
>> 1. Verify Github repos is upto date and correct
>> 2. we mark SVN read only
>> 3. we clone the Github repos into Gitbox
>> 4. we make them both writable
>>
>> # We can have multiple Repositories.
>>
>> # Gavin also whish that the depreciated CMS can be shut down in 3 month.
>> I promised we look into it and try to accomplish in the time. There are
>> no deadlines yet.
>>
>>
>> I suggest the following migration Approach:
>>
>> 1) We migrate OpenOffice Code to git
>>
>> 1.1.) OpenOffice main will move into one repository
>>
>> 1.2) OpenOffice ext_source and ext_libraries will be split, and each
>> dependency gets its own repository.
>>
>> 1.3) extras/l10n will become an own repositry
>>
>> 1.4) test will become an own repository.
>>
>> 1.5) we adjust our build environment to reflect the new structure. I.e.
>> You need only checkout core and bootstrap can download everything else.
>> unzip step can be skipped.
>>
>> 2) We migrate CMS to a new solution. We have the option to go for the
>> alterantive, honestly I would like to migrate to a easy to use sollution
>> like neo CMS and migrate the mwiki too.
>>
>> We need to be able to lower the barrier for non tech work where ever we
>> can.
>>
>> 3) PMC folder should be migrated into CWiki.
>>
>>
>>
>> All the Best
>>
>> Peter
>>
>> Older Discussions on the migration on [1],[2]
>>
>> [0]
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Git+Migration+-+Chat+Protocol+with+Gavin
>>
>> [1]
>>
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/c972affc61caf4844e7c82f7be9edf10fcd50753884cbaa7399999d1@%3Cdev.openoffice.apache.org%3E
>>
>> [2]
>>
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4db20d193cc30850e63dc03378a20462d1e5c113e566fffd6c776d1c@%3Cdev.openoffice.apache.org%3E
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
--
Mechtilde Stehmann
## Apache OpenOffice
## Freie Office Suite für Linux, MacOSX, Windows
## Debian Developer
## PGP encryption welcome
## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899 39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F
Re: [discussion] svn migration plan
Posted by Damjan Jovanovic <da...@apache.org>.
That's a great idea, thank you!
1.1 - 1.5: test/ requires main/ to build, for Ant scripts. main/ requires
ext_libraries/ if not more.
Why can't we use one repository for everything, like the Github mirror
already does?
Regards
Damjan
On Sat, Jul 20, 2019 at 2:16 PM Peter Kovacs <Pe...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hello all,
>
>
> I had a talk with Gavin today, informing myself about the migration from
> SVN to Git. Since we have already a github mirror process we can not use
> the self service.
>
> I copied the chat to Cwiki, in order everyone can review what have been
> spoken about. [0]
>
> Summary:
>
> We have to open a ticket at infra and order the migration. The migration
> in general will consist of the following steps (taken from slack, chat
> protocol):
>
> The Infra steps in short
>
> 1. Verify Github repos is upto date and correct
> 2. we mark SVN read only
> 3. we clone the Github repos into Gitbox
> 4. we make them both writable
>
> # We can have multiple Repositories.
>
> # Gavin also whish that the depreciated CMS can be shut down in 3 month.
> I promised we look into it and try to accomplish in the time. There are
> no deadlines yet.
>
>
> I suggest the following migration Approach:
>
> 1) We migrate OpenOffice Code to git
>
> 1.1.) OpenOffice main will move into one repository
>
> 1.2) OpenOffice ext_source and ext_libraries will be split, and each
> dependency gets its own repository.
>
> 1.3) extras/l10n will become an own repositry
>
> 1.4) test will become an own repository.
>
> 1.5) we adjust our build environment to reflect the new structure. I.e.
> You need only checkout core and bootstrap can download everything else.
> unzip step can be skipped.
>
> 2) We migrate CMS to a new solution. We have the option to go for the
> alterantive, honestly I would like to migrate to a easy to use sollution
> like neo CMS and migrate the mwiki too.
>
> We need to be able to lower the barrier for non tech work where ever we
> can.
>
> 3) PMC folder should be migrated into CWiki.
>
>
>
> All the Best
>
> Peter
>
> Older Discussions on the migration on [1],[2]
>
> [0]
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/Git+Migration+-+Chat+Protocol+with+Gavin
>
> [1]
>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/c972affc61caf4844e7c82f7be9edf10fcd50753884cbaa7399999d1@%3Cdev.openoffice.apache.org%3E
>
> [2]
>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/4db20d193cc30850e63dc03378a20462d1e5c113e566fffd6c776d1c@%3Cdev.openoffice.apache.org%3E
>
>
>
>
>
Re: [resolution] we are now on gitbox and github (was: svn migration
plan)
Posted by Mechtilde <oo...@mechtilde.de>.
Am 03.08.19 um 10:16 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> I have not managed to find the information to change in our source CMS
> webside.
>
> If you link your github account here with Apache, then you get write
> access on github directly:
>
> https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/
I'm trying to folloe the instructions
>
>
Kind regards
--
Mechtilde Stehmann
## Apache OpenOffice
## Freie Office Suite für Linux, MacOSX, Windows
## Debian Developer
## PGP encryption welcome
## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899 39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F
Re: [resolution] we are now on gitbox and github (was: svn migration
plan)
Posted by Peter Kovacs <Pe...@Apache.org>.
I have not managed to find the information to change in our source CMS
webside.
If you link your github account here with Apache, then you get write
access on github directly:
https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/
All the Best
Peter
On 03.08.19 08:25, Peter Kovacs wrote:
> On 03.08.19 08:20, Mechtilde wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Am 03.08.19 um 07:58 schrieb Damjan Jovanovic:
>>> On Sat, Aug 3, 2019 at 7:47 AM Peter Kovacs <Pe...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> I suggest we use the short hash.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> For what? Why can't we "git tag" relevant commits and use the tag instead?
>> I think we should have an identifier for each build which is done beside
>> tha tag for the "relevant commits"
> Yea focus is more on development. For releases we should use or add the tag.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [resolution] svn migration plan
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Hi Bidouille,
Am 03.08.19 um 11:47 schrieb Bidouille:
> Do you have published announcement on AOO blog?
We still have to iron out some things, but then I would definitely be
for a Blog post!
Regards,
Matthias
> That will be fine.
>
> ----- Mail original -----
>> De: "Peter Kovacs" <Pe...@Apache.org>
>> À: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>> Envoyé: Samedi 3 Août 2019 08:25:25
>> Objet: Re: [resolution] svn migration plan
>>
>>
>> On 03.08.19 08:20, Mechtilde wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Am 03.08.19 um 07:58 schrieb Damjan Jovanovic:
>>>> On Sat, Aug 3, 2019 at 7:47 AM Peter Kovacs <Pe...@apache.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> I suggest we use the short hash.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> For what? Why can't we "git tag" relevant commits and use the tag
>>>> instead?
>>> I think we should have an identifier for each build which is done
>>> beside
>>> tha tag for the "relevant commits"
>> Yea focus is more on development. For releases we should use or add
>> the tag.
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: [resolution] svn migration plan
Posted by Bidouille <oo...@free.fr>.
Do you have published announcement on AOO blog?
That will be fine.
----- Mail original -----
> De: "Peter Kovacs" <Pe...@Apache.org>
> À: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Envoyé: Samedi 3 Août 2019 08:25:25
> Objet: Re: [resolution] svn migration plan
>
>
> On 03.08.19 08:20, Mechtilde wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Am 03.08.19 um 07:58 schrieb Damjan Jovanovic:
> >> On Sat, Aug 3, 2019 at 7:47 AM Peter Kovacs <Pe...@apache.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>> I suggest we use the short hash.
> >>>
> >>>
> >> For what? Why can't we "git tag" relevant commits and use the tag
> >> instead?
> > I think we should have an identifier for each build which is done
> > beside
> > tha tag for the "relevant commits"
> Yea focus is more on development. For releases we should use or add
> the tag.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [resolution] svn migration plan
Posted by Peter Kovacs <Pe...@Apache.org>.
On 03.08.19 08:20, Mechtilde wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Am 03.08.19 um 07:58 schrieb Damjan Jovanovic:
>> On Sat, Aug 3, 2019 at 7:47 AM Peter Kovacs <Pe...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> I suggest we use the short hash.
>>>
>>>
>> For what? Why can't we "git tag" relevant commits and use the tag instead?
> I think we should have an identifier for each build which is done beside
> tha tag for the "relevant commits"
Yea focus is more on development. For releases we should use or add the tag.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [resolution] svn migration plan
Posted by Mechtilde <oo...@mechtilde.de>.
Hello,
Am 03.08.19 um 07:58 schrieb Damjan Jovanovic:
> On Sat, Aug 3, 2019 at 7:47 AM Peter Kovacs <Pe...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> I have pushed Infra a bit. We are now migrating.
>>
>> So migration will be finished soon.
>>
>>
> Excellent :).
>
>
>>
>> I suggest we use the short hash.
>>
>>
> For what? Why can't we "git tag" relevant commits and use the tag instead?
I think we should have an identifier for each build which is done beside
tha tag for the "relevant commits"
>
> Damjan
>
Kind regards
--
Mechtilde Stehmann
## Apache OpenOffice
## Freie Office Suite für Linux, MacOSX, Windows
## Debian Developer
## PGP encryption welcome
## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899 39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F
Re: [resolution] svn migration plan
Posted by Damjan Jovanovic <da...@apache.org>.
On Sat, Aug 3, 2019 at 7:47 AM Peter Kovacs <Pe...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I have pushed Infra a bit. We are now migrating.
>
> So migration will be finished soon.
>
>
Excellent :).
>
> I suggest we use the short hash.
>
>
For what? Why can't we "git tag" relevant commits and use the tag instead?
Damjan
Re: [resolution] svn migration plan
Posted by Peter Kovacs <pe...@apache.org>.
Agreed. Cms is another beast. I think it would be a good idea to sum up the current discussion on a cwiki page.
Am 14. August 2019 11:21:10 MESZ schrieb Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>:
>On 03/08/2019 Peter Kovacs wrote:
>> I have pushed Infra a bit. We are now migrating. ...
>> Sorry if this moves now a bit uncoordinated, but I want to get this
>done.
>
>It's now clear that this was indeed quite rushed, but I'm prepared to
>working with git too and I'm sure we can fix the missing bits with
>time.
>
>For example, there is still a lot of documentation to be updated and
>adding a quick git clone command here and there in the wiki is enough
>for us, but confusing for the general public.
>
>Anyway, good to see this done! I'm remarking about the speed just
>because the CMS (which shouldn't have been part of this discussion at
>all) will require a much more detailed plan, as it is already very
>clear
>from the discussion on list.
>
>Regards,
> Andrea.
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [resolution] svn migration plan
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
Mechtilde wrote:
> Am 14.08.19 um 11:21 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
>> adding a quick git clone command here and there in the wiki is enough
>> for us, but confusing for the general public.
> The entries I found, I added the git clone command
This is a good example of something that is enough for us but confusing
for the general public. See
https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO
where we still have the SVN commands (which WILL work and give you the
frozen SVN trunk, with no indications that this is frozen; it is now
easy to say that we should have added a last SVN commit mentioning git),
then the new git command, then notes like "You can use git as well.
There exists no guide for this, therefore ask on dev@, if you want to
use git".
I would be for only listing the git commands, re-reading the entire page
and re-writing the sections that mention SVN.
Old versions of the page are easily visible to everybody, so we can use
https://wiki.openoffice.org/w/index.php?title=Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO&oldid=245569
as "the latest version before the switch to git" in case.
For sure, once one has properly ported
1. https://openoffice.apache.org/source.html
2. https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/Building_Guide_AOO
things will be much clearer to the public, but also to us (the fact that
I see patches sent by mail, and not link to pull requests, makes me
think we are still unclear about our own processes).
I will start with updating page 1 above; I think this will leave me with
some questions about what conventions we are using for git, so it will
be a useful exercise.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [resolution] svn migration plan
Posted by Mechtilde <oo...@mechtilde.de>.
Hello Andrea,
hello *
Am 14.08.19 um 11:21 schrieb Andrea Pescetti:
> On 03/08/2019 Peter Kovacs wrote:
>> I have pushed Infra a bit. We are now migrating. ...
>> Sorry if this moves now a bit uncoordinated, but I want to get this done.
>
> It's now clear that this was indeed quite rushed, but I'm prepared to
> working with git too and I'm sure we can fix the missing bits with time.
>
> For example, there is still a lot of documentation to be updated and
> adding a quick git clone command here and there in the wiki is enough
> for us, but confusing for the general public.
The entries I found, I added the git clone command
>
> Anyway, good to see this done! I'm remarking about the speed just
> because the CMS (which shouldn't have been part of this discussion at
> all) will require a much more detailed plan, as it is already very clear
> from the discussion on list.>
> Regards,
> Andrea.
Regards
--
Mechtilde Stehmann
## Apache OpenOffice
## Freie Office Suite für Linux, MacOSX, Windows
## Debian Developer
## PGP encryption welcome
## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899 39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F
Re: [resolution] svn migration plan
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
On 03/08/2019 Peter Kovacs wrote:
> I have pushed Infra a bit. We are now migrating. ...
> Sorry if this moves now a bit uncoordinated, but I want to get this done.
It's now clear that this was indeed quite rushed, but I'm prepared to
working with git too and I'm sure we can fix the missing bits with time.
For example, there is still a lot of documentation to be updated and
adding a quick git clone command here and there in the wiki is enough
for us, but confusing for the general public.
Anyway, good to see this done! I'm remarking about the speed just
because the CMS (which shouldn't have been part of this discussion at
all) will require a much more detailed plan, as it is already very clear
from the discussion on list.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [resolution] svn migration plan
Posted by Mechtilde <oo...@mechtilde.de>.
Hello
Am 03.08.19 um 07:47 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> Hello all,
>
> I have pushed Infra a bit. We are now migrating.
>
> So migration will be finished soon.
>
After finishing the migration the SVN repository is frozen.
All commits are only visible under
https://github.com/apache/openoffice
and under
https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=openoffice.git
Peter wrotes:
If you link your github account here with Apache, then you get write
access on github directly:
https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/
Keind regards
--
Mechtilde Stehmann
## Apache OpenOffice
## Freie Office Suite für Linux, MacOSX, Windows
## Debian Developer
## PGP encryption welcome
## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899 39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F
Re: [resolution] svn migration plan
Posted by Peter Kovacs <Pe...@Apache.org>.
Hello all,
I have pushed Infra a bit. We are now migrating.
So migration will be finished soon.
I suggest we use the short hash.
I will try to change the Code link.
What else do we need to do?
Sorry if this moves now a bit uncoordinated, but I want to get this done.
On 29.07.19 20:39, Peter Kovacs wrote:
> On 29.07.19 17:18, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>> Hi Peter,
>>
>> Am 29.07.19 um 00:39 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>> A different suggestion we use the git commit count. The command is:
>>>
>>> |git rev-list --all --count It will deliver something that looks similar
>>> to the svn number we already use. All the Best Peter |
>> How would such a simple count point to a specific commit/revision?
>>
> I checked this,. In theory it should but there are a lots of option how
> to count in git.
>
> Which makes this not so optimal as on first glance. But it seems a lot
> of people use it to stick to a revision number.
>
> So there seems to be only 2 true options for referencing the commit:
>
> 1) We use the short hash.
>
> 2) We tag releases automatically at checkin.
>
>
> Tbh I would rather use the v
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [discussion] svn migration plan
Posted by Peter Kovacs <Pe...@Apache.org>.
On 29.07.19 17:18, Matthias Seidel wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> Am 29.07.19 um 00:39 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>> A different suggestion we use the git commit count. The command is:
>>
>> |git rev-list --all --count It will deliver something that looks similar
>> to the svn number we already use. All the Best Peter |
> How would such a simple count point to a specific commit/revision?
>
I checked this,. In theory it should but there are a lots of option how
to count in git.
Which makes this not so optimal as on first glance. But it seems a lot
of people use it to stick to a revision number.
So there seems to be only 2 true options for referencing the commit:
1) We use the short hash.
2) We tag releases automatically at checkin.
Tbh I would rather use the short hash.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [discussion] svn migration plan
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Hi Peter,
Am 29.07.19 um 00:39 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> A different suggestion we use the git commit count. The command is:
>
> |git rev-list --all --count It will deliver something that looks similar
> to the svn number we already use. All the Best Peter |
How would such a simple count point to a specific commit/revision?
Regards,
Matthias
>
> On 29.07.19 00:17, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>> Hi Marcus,
>>
>> Am 28.07.19 um 23:12 schrieb Marcus:
>>> Am 28.07.19 um 20:29 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>> Am 28.07.19 um 20:12 schrieb Marcus:
>>>>> Am 27.07.19 um 13:45 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>>>> Am 23.07.19 um 11:08 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>>>>> Am 21.07.19 um 12:27 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>> Hi Matthias,
>>>
>>>>>>>> back to the initial discussion.
>>>>>>> Obviously you didn't read my mail until the end...
>>>>>>>> I have created the request. Simply requesting that trunc, branch and
>>>>>>>> tags are moved. All other folders should remain as is.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I hope this suits everyone.
>>>>>>> Do we have the necessary code changes ready?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We use the SVN revision in our About dialog, and for creating the
>>>>>>> source
>>>>>>> builds. This has to be adapted when we switch to git.
>>>>>>> Using the git hash (short or long) instead? This should have been
>>>>>>> discussed...
>>>>>> Given the lack of response, this has yet to be investigated...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Meanwhile my builds on Windows are now done from git. Additionally
>>>>>> I did
>>>>>> checkout from git on ArcaOS (OS/2) without problems.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> @Marcus:
>>>>>> The switch to git hash (instead of SVN revision) would require some
>>>>>> changes in the logic of our download page. Can you evaluate?
>>>>> I don't see any real dependency between our download webapge and SVN;
>>>>> except with the writen SVN rev. with fixed text on the HTML webpage:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.openoffice.org/download/index.html
>>>>>
>>>>> Release: Milestone AOO416m1 | Build ID 9790 | SVN r1844436 | Released
>>>>> 2018-11-18 | Release Notes
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you tell me how a Git hash on our pache servers looks like? If
>>>>> there is no big difference in size, then it should be a problem.
>>>> Exactly! There is a short and a long git hash. Which one we choose
>>>> hasn't been discussed yet. We would have to take either one for new
>>>> builds and leave the SVN revision for the old builds.
>>>>
>>>> I just wanted to make sure that we think about such topics *before* we
>>>> switch.
>>> sure, but please tell me how a Git hash (short and long) looks like.
>>> Then we can judge if it fits.
>> Looking at Damjans last commit:
>> https://github.com/apache/openoffice/commit/779db4a01a7b0297a1573645c842007eab71ab85
>>
>> 779db4a01a7b0297a1573645c842007eab71ab85 is the long hash
>>
>> 779db4a0 would be the short
>>
>> See also:
>>
>> https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-Tools-Revision-Selection
>>
>> Our git is mirrored from SVN and contains:
>> git-svn-id: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk@1863883
>>
>> 1863883 is the SVN revision which is taken when building from our git at
>> the moment.
>>
>> I *think* the code is in here:
>> main/solenv/bin/modules/SvnRevision.pm
>>
>> That said, I am far away from being a specialist on this topic. ;-)
>>
>>>>> *But:*
>>>>>
>>>>> The biggest change is for the CMS. Does it support also Git? If not,
>>>>> then we shouldn't change also the website repo to Git as nobody of us
>>>>> (IMHO) can support this change.
>>>> As I understand it Peter only wants to switch trunk, branches and tags
>>>> to Git, not (yet) the CMS (site and ooo-site).
>>> Let's discuss this in the other thread.
>> Which other thread?
>>
>> Matthias
>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Marcus
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>> BTW: My latest builds are based on a checkout from git, no problems
>>>>>>> so far.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please review:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-18773
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 21.07.19 01:42, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi brane,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The threads are linked in my first post.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It is for me a workflow thing.
>>>>>>>>> I need a decentral versioning system instead of a central one.
>>>>>>>>> And I want github as public patch interface.
>>>>>>>>> Both do not work with svn.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I add a reason that I heard at work. Young people do not know svn.
>>>>>>>>> They expect to work with git.
>>>>>>>>> IMHO it is a dumb argument but in my country the fresh people
>>>>>>>>> from university are dictating a little their working environment.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ahh and git has major pains reading OpenOffice svn repo. So I
>>>>>>>>> can't even use git as a client.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> All the best.
>>>>>>>>> Peter
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Am 21. Juli 2019 01:17:32 MESZ schrieb "Branko Čibej"
>>>>>>>>> <br...@apache.org>:
>>>>>>>>>> Hi AOO devs,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I just stumbled onto this thread. Coming from subversion.a.o, I'm
>>>>>>>>>> saddened
>>>>>>>>>> to see you've decided to switch to Git. Could someone please
>>>>>>>>>> summarise
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> reasons for this decision, or give me a link to the discussion in
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> mail
>>>>>>>>>> archives? I'd very much like to know if it was caused by some
>>>>>>>>>> specific
>>>>>>>>>> problem or missing feature in Subversion that we may be able to
>>>>>>>>>> address.
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
Re: [discussion] svn migration plan
Posted by Peter Kovacs <Pe...@Apache.org>.
A different suggestion we use the git commit count. The command is:
|git rev-list --all --count It will deliver something that looks similar
to the svn number we already use. All the Best Peter |
On 29.07.19 00:17, Matthias Seidel wrote:
> Hi Marcus,
>
> Am 28.07.19 um 23:12 schrieb Marcus:
>> Am 28.07.19 um 20:29 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>> Am 28.07.19 um 20:12 schrieb Marcus:
>>>> Am 27.07.19 um 13:45 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>>> Am 23.07.19 um 11:08 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>>>> Am 21.07.19 um 12:27 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>> Hi Matthias,
>>
>>>>>>> back to the initial discussion.
>>>>>> Obviously you didn't read my mail until the end...
>>>>>>> I have created the request. Simply requesting that trunc, branch and
>>>>>>> tags are moved. All other folders should remain as is.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I hope this suits everyone.
>>>>>> Do we have the necessary code changes ready?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We use the SVN revision in our About dialog, and for creating the
>>>>>> source
>>>>>> builds. This has to be adapted when we switch to git.
>>>>>> Using the git hash (short or long) instead? This should have been
>>>>>> discussed...
>>>>> Given the lack of response, this has yet to be investigated...
>>>>>
>>>>> Meanwhile my builds on Windows are now done from git. Additionally
>>>>> I did
>>>>> checkout from git on ArcaOS (OS/2) without problems.
>>>>>
>>>>> @Marcus:
>>>>> The switch to git hash (instead of SVN revision) would require some
>>>>> changes in the logic of our download page. Can you evaluate?
>>>> I don't see any real dependency between our download webapge and SVN;
>>>> except with the writen SVN rev. with fixed text on the HTML webpage:
>>>>
>>>> https://www.openoffice.org/download/index.html
>>>>
>>>> Release: Milestone AOO416m1 | Build ID 9790 | SVN r1844436 | Released
>>>> 2018-11-18 | Release Notes
>>>>
>>>> Can you tell me how a Git hash on our pache servers looks like? If
>>>> there is no big difference in size, then it should be a problem.
>>> Exactly! There is a short and a long git hash. Which one we choose
>>> hasn't been discussed yet. We would have to take either one for new
>>> builds and leave the SVN revision for the old builds.
>>>
>>> I just wanted to make sure that we think about such topics *before* we
>>> switch.
>> sure, but please tell me how a Git hash (short and long) looks like.
>> Then we can judge if it fits.
> Looking at Damjans last commit:
> https://github.com/apache/openoffice/commit/779db4a01a7b0297a1573645c842007eab71ab85
>
> 779db4a01a7b0297a1573645c842007eab71ab85 is the long hash
>
> 779db4a0 would be the short
>
> See also:
>
> https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-Tools-Revision-Selection
>
> Our git is mirrored from SVN and contains:
> git-svn-id: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk@1863883
>
> 1863883 is the SVN revision which is taken when building from our git at
> the moment.
>
> I *think* the code is in here:
> main/solenv/bin/modules/SvnRevision.pm
>
> That said, I am far away from being a specialist on this topic. ;-)
>
>>>> *But:*
>>>>
>>>> The biggest change is for the CMS. Does it support also Git? If not,
>>>> then we shouldn't change also the website repo to Git as nobody of us
>>>> (IMHO) can support this change.
>>> As I understand it Peter only wants to switch trunk, branches and tags
>>> to Git, not (yet) the CMS (site and ooo-site).
>> Let's discuss this in the other thread.
> Which other thread?
>
> Matthias
>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>>
>>
>>>>>> BTW: My latest builds are based on a checkout from git, no problems
>>>>>> so far.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please review:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-18773
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 21.07.19 01:42, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi brane,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The threads are linked in my first post.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It is for me a workflow thing.
>>>>>>>> I need a decentral versioning system instead of a central one.
>>>>>>>> And I want github as public patch interface.
>>>>>>>> Both do not work with svn.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I add a reason that I heard at work. Young people do not know svn.
>>>>>>>> They expect to work with git.
>>>>>>>> IMHO it is a dumb argument but in my country the fresh people
>>>>>>>> from university are dictating a little their working environment.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ahh and git has major pains reading OpenOffice svn repo. So I
>>>>>>>> can't even use git as a client.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> All the best.
>>>>>>>> Peter
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Am 21. Juli 2019 01:17:32 MESZ schrieb "Branko Čibej"
>>>>>>>> <br...@apache.org>:
>>>>>>>>> Hi AOO devs,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I just stumbled onto this thread. Coming from subversion.a.o, I'm
>>>>>>>>> saddened
>>>>>>>>> to see you've decided to switch to Git. Could someone please
>>>>>>>>> summarise
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> reasons for this decision, or give me a link to the discussion in
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> mail
>>>>>>>>> archives? I'd very much like to know if it was caused by some
>>>>>>>>> specific
>>>>>>>>> problem or missing feature in Subversion that we may be able to
>>>>>>>>> address.
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
Re: [discussion] svn migration plan
Posted by Marcus <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 29.07.19 um 00:17 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
> Am 28.07.19 um 23:12 schrieb Marcus:
>> Am 28.07.19 um 20:29 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>> Am 28.07.19 um 20:12 schrieb Marcus:
>>>> Am 27.07.19 um 13:45 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>>> Am 23.07.19 um 11:08 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>>>> Am 21.07.19 um 12:27 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
Hi Matthias,
>>>>>>> back to the initial discussion.
>>>>>> Obviously you didn't read my mail until the end...
>>>>>>> I have created the request. Simply requesting that trunc, branch and
>>>>>>> tags are moved. All other folders should remain as is.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I hope this suits everyone.
>>>>>> Do we have the necessary code changes ready?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We use the SVN revision in our About dialog, and for creating the
>>>>>> source
>>>>>> builds. This has to be adapted when we switch to git.
>>>>>> Using the git hash (short or long) instead? This should have been
>>>>>> discussed...
>>>>>
>>>>> Given the lack of response, this has yet to be investigated...
>>>>>
>>>>> Meanwhile my builds on Windows are now done from git. Additionally
>>>>> I did
>>>>> checkout from git on ArcaOS (OS/2) without problems.
>>>>>
>>>>> @Marcus:
>>>>> The switch to git hash (instead of SVN revision) would require some
>>>>> changes in the logic of our download page. Can you evaluate?
>>>>
>>>> I don't see any real dependency between our download webapge and SVN;
>>>> except with the writen SVN rev. with fixed text on the HTML webpage:
>>>>
>>>> https://www.openoffice.org/download/index.html
>>>>
>>>> Release: Milestone AOO416m1 | Build ID 9790 | SVN r1844436 | Released
>>>> 2018-11-18 | Release Notes
>>>>
>>>> Can you tell me how a Git hash on our pache servers looks like? If
>>>> there is no big difference in size, then it should be a problem.
>>>
>>> Exactly! There is a short and a long git hash. Which one we choose
>>> hasn't been discussed yet. We would have to take either one for new
>>> builds and leave the SVN revision for the old builds.
>>>
>>> I just wanted to make sure that we think about such topics *before* we
>>> switch.
>>
>> sure, but please tell me how a Git hash (short and long) looks like.
>> Then we can judge if it fits.
>
> Looking at Damjans last commit:
> https://github.com/apache/openoffice/commit/779db4a01a7b0297a1573645c842007eab71ab85
>
> 779db4a01a7b0297a1573645c842007eab71ab85 is the long hash
>
> 779db4a0 would be the short
thanks for the examples.
Marcus
> See also:
>
> https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-Tools-Revision-Selection
>
> Our git is mirrored from SVN and contains:
> git-svn-id: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk@1863883
>
> 1863883 is the SVN revision which is taken when building from our git at
> the moment.
>
> I *think* the code is in here:
> main/solenv/bin/modules/SvnRevision.pm
>
> That said, I am far away from being a specialist on this topic. ;-)
>
>>
>>>> *But:*
>>>>
>>>> The biggest change is for the CMS. Does it support also Git? If not,
>>>> then we shouldn't change also the website repo to Git as nobody of us
>>>> (IMHO) can support this change.
>>> As I understand it Peter only wants to switch trunk, branches and tags
>>> to Git, not (yet) the CMS (site and ooo-site).
>>
>> Let's discuss this in the other thread.
>
> Which other thread?
>
> Matthias
>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>>
>>
>>>>>> BTW: My latest builds are based on a checkout from git, no problems
>>>>>> so far.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please review:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-18773
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 21.07.19 01:42, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi brane,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The threads are linked in my first post.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It is for me a workflow thing.
>>>>>>>> I need a decentral versioning system instead of a central one.
>>>>>>>> And I want github as public patch interface.
>>>>>>>> Both do not work with svn.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I add a reason that I heard at work. Young people do not know svn.
>>>>>>>> They expect to work with git.
>>>>>>>> IMHO it is a dumb argument but in my country the fresh people
>>>>>>>> from university are dictating a little their working environment.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ahh and git has major pains reading OpenOffice svn repo. So I
>>>>>>>> can't even use git as a client.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> All the best.
>>>>>>>> Peter
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Am 21. Juli 2019 01:17:32 MESZ schrieb "Branko Čibej"
>>>>>>>> <br...@apache.org>:
>>>>>>>>> Hi AOO devs,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I just stumbled onto this thread. Coming from subversion.a.o, I'm
>>>>>>>>> saddened
>>>>>>>>> to see you've decided to switch to Git. Could someone please
>>>>>>>>> summarise
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> reasons for this decision, or give me a link to the discussion in
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> mail
>>>>>>>>> archives? I'd very much like to know if it was caused by some
>>>>>>>>> specific
>>>>>>>>> problem or missing feature in Subversion that we may be able to
>>>>>>>>> address.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [discussion] svn migration plan
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Hi Marcus,
Am 28.07.19 um 23:12 schrieb Marcus:
> Am 28.07.19 um 20:29 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>> Am 28.07.19 um 20:12 schrieb Marcus:
>>> Am 27.07.19 um 13:45 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>> Am 23.07.19 um 11:08 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>>> Am 21.07.19 um 12:27 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>
> Hi Matthias,
>
>>>>>> back to the initial discussion.
>>>>> Obviously you didn't read my mail until the end...
>>>>>> I have created the request. Simply requesting that trunc, branch and
>>>>>> tags are moved. All other folders should remain as is.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I hope this suits everyone.
>>>>> Do we have the necessary code changes ready?
>>>>>
>>>>> We use the SVN revision in our About dialog, and for creating the
>>>>> source
>>>>> builds. This has to be adapted when we switch to git.
>>>>> Using the git hash (short or long) instead? This should have been
>>>>> discussed...
>>>>
>>>> Given the lack of response, this has yet to be investigated...
>>>>
>>>> Meanwhile my builds on Windows are now done from git. Additionally
>>>> I did
>>>> checkout from git on ArcaOS (OS/2) without problems.
>>>>
>>>> @Marcus:
>>>> The switch to git hash (instead of SVN revision) would require some
>>>> changes in the logic of our download page. Can you evaluate?
>>>
>>> I don't see any real dependency between our download webapge and SVN;
>>> except with the writen SVN rev. with fixed text on the HTML webpage:
>>>
>>> https://www.openoffice.org/download/index.html
>>>
>>> Release: Milestone AOO416m1 | Build ID 9790 | SVN r1844436 | Released
>>> 2018-11-18 | Release Notes
>>>
>>> Can you tell me how a Git hash on our pache servers looks like? If
>>> there is no big difference in size, then it should be a problem.
>>
>> Exactly! There is a short and a long git hash. Which one we choose
>> hasn't been discussed yet. We would have to take either one for new
>> builds and leave the SVN revision for the old builds.
>>
>> I just wanted to make sure that we think about such topics *before* we
>> switch.
>
> sure, but please tell me how a Git hash (short and long) looks like.
> Then we can judge if it fits.
Looking at Damjans last commit:
https://github.com/apache/openoffice/commit/779db4a01a7b0297a1573645c842007eab71ab85
779db4a01a7b0297a1573645c842007eab71ab85 is the long hash
779db4a0 would be the short
See also:
https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-Tools-Revision-Selection
Our git is mirrored from SVN and contains:
git-svn-id: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/trunk@1863883
1863883 is the SVN revision which is taken when building from our git at
the moment.
I *think* the code is in here:
main/solenv/bin/modules/SvnRevision.pm
That said, I am far away from being a specialist on this topic. ;-)
>
>>> *But:*
>>>
>>> The biggest change is for the CMS. Does it support also Git? If not,
>>> then we shouldn't change also the website repo to Git as nobody of us
>>> (IMHO) can support this change.
>> As I understand it Peter only wants to switch trunk, branches and tags
>> to Git, not (yet) the CMS (site and ooo-site).
>
> Let's discuss this in the other thread.
Which other thread?
Matthias
>
> Thanks
>
> Marcus
>
>
>
>>>>> BTW: My latest builds are based on a checkout from git, no problems
>>>>> so far.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Please review:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-18773
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 21.07.19 01:42, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi brane,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The threads are linked in my first post.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It is for me a workflow thing.
>>>>>>> I need a decentral versioning system instead of a central one.
>>>>>>> And I want github as public patch interface.
>>>>>>> Both do not work with svn.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I add a reason that I heard at work. Young people do not know svn.
>>>>>>> They expect to work with git.
>>>>>>> IMHO it is a dumb argument but in my country the fresh people
>>>>>>> from university are dictating a little their working environment.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ahh and git has major pains reading OpenOffice svn repo. So I
>>>>>>> can't even use git as a client.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> All the best.
>>>>>>> Peter
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Am 21. Juli 2019 01:17:32 MESZ schrieb "Branko Čibej"
>>>>>>> <br...@apache.org>:
>>>>>>>> Hi AOO devs,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I just stumbled onto this thread. Coming from subversion.a.o, I'm
>>>>>>>> saddened
>>>>>>>> to see you've decided to switch to Git. Could someone please
>>>>>>>> summarise
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> reasons for this decision, or give me a link to the discussion in
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> mail
>>>>>>>> archives? I'd very much like to know if it was caused by some
>>>>>>>> specific
>>>>>>>> problem or missing feature in Subversion that we may be able to
>>>>>>>> address.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
Re: [discussion] svn migration plan
Posted by Marcus <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 28.07.19 um 20:29 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
> Am 28.07.19 um 20:12 schrieb Marcus:
>> Am 27.07.19 um 13:45 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>> Am 23.07.19 um 11:08 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>> Am 21.07.19 um 12:27 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
Hi Matthias,
>>>>> back to the initial discussion.
>>>> Obviously you didn't read my mail until the end...
>>>>> I have created the request. Simply requesting that trunc, branch and
>>>>> tags are moved. All other folders should remain as is.
>>>>>
>>>>> I hope this suits everyone.
>>>> Do we have the necessary code changes ready?
>>>>
>>>> We use the SVN revision in our About dialog, and for creating the
>>>> source
>>>> builds. This has to be adapted when we switch to git.
>>>> Using the git hash (short or long) instead? This should have been
>>>> discussed...
>>>
>>> Given the lack of response, this has yet to be investigated...
>>>
>>> Meanwhile my builds on Windows are now done from git. Additionally I did
>>> checkout from git on ArcaOS (OS/2) without problems.
>>>
>>> @Marcus:
>>> The switch to git hash (instead of SVN revision) would require some
>>> changes in the logic of our download page. Can you evaluate?
>>
>> I don't see any real dependency between our download webapge and SVN;
>> except with the writen SVN rev. with fixed text on the HTML webpage:
>>
>> https://www.openoffice.org/download/index.html
>>
>> Release: Milestone AOO416m1 | Build ID 9790 | SVN r1844436 | Released
>> 2018-11-18 | Release Notes
>>
>> Can you tell me how a Git hash on our pache servers looks like? If
>> there is no big difference in size, then it should be a problem.
>
> Exactly! There is a short and a long git hash. Which one we choose
> hasn't been discussed yet. We would have to take either one for new
> builds and leave the SVN revision for the old builds.
>
> I just wanted to make sure that we think about such topics *before* we
> switch.
sure, but please tell me how a Git hash (short and long) looks like.
Then we can judge if it fits.
>> *But:*
>>
>> The biggest change is for the CMS. Does it support also Git? If not,
>> then we shouldn't change also the website repo to Git as nobody of us
>> (IMHO) can support this change.
> As I understand it Peter only wants to switch trunk, branches and tags
> to Git, not (yet) the CMS (site and ooo-site).
Let's discuss this in the other thread.
Thanks
Marcus
>>>> BTW: My latest builds are based on a checkout from git, no problems
>>>> so far.
>>>>
>>>>> Please review:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-18773
>>>>>
>>>>> On 21.07.19 01:42, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>>>>> Hi brane,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The threads are linked in my first post.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is for me a workflow thing.
>>>>>> I need a decentral versioning system instead of a central one.
>>>>>> And I want github as public patch interface.
>>>>>> Both do not work with svn.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I add a reason that I heard at work. Young people do not know svn.
>>>>>> They expect to work with git.
>>>>>> IMHO it is a dumb argument but in my country the fresh people
>>>>>> from university are dictating a little their working environment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ahh and git has major pains reading OpenOffice svn repo. So I
>>>>>> can't even use git as a client.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All the best.
>>>>>> Peter
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 21. Juli 2019 01:17:32 MESZ schrieb "Branko Čibej"
>>>>>> <br...@apache.org>:
>>>>>>> Hi AOO devs,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I just stumbled onto this thread. Coming from subversion.a.o, I'm
>>>>>>> saddened
>>>>>>> to see you've decided to switch to Git. Could someone please
>>>>>>> summarise
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> reasons for this decision, or give me a link to the discussion in
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> mail
>>>>>>> archives? I'd very much like to know if it was caused by some
>>>>>>> specific
>>>>>>> problem or missing feature in Subversion that we may be able to
>>>>>>> address.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [discussion] CMS migration
Posted by Marcus <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 29.07.19 um 00:53 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> On 28.07.19 23:10, Marcus wrote:
>> Am 28.07.19 um 21:31 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>> Cms will be shut down soon. The question is how we deal with this.
>>> Info is in the chat protocol in my original post.
>>
>> OK, then we will have a big problem in order to serve our website pages.
>>
>> Marcus
>>
> There are no deadlines yet. Just whishes on time frame. There is current
> a loose target at Infra in 3 month. Lets say november. If we manage to
> switch at december we will still be fine.
>
> Infra offers an incompatible replacement suite. Maybe there will be
> migration scripts helping us with the migration.
>
> I would like more to move to a easy to use cms system that might help us
> to reduce tech diversity and maintenance. I am quite fond of neo (1)
>
> Neo looks interesting since it promises a easy to use front end, multi
> language setup of content and the ability to integrate other sites and
> resources, while technical relative "easy" maintenance.
>
> Both Ideas sound like promising ways. with pro and cons. I am open for
> more ways.
I hate to be the bad guy. However, there is another point that we need
to take into account which is very important:
As we haven't much people that can do such a big migration step, we
really need to go the easy way.
So, when the Infra team has finished their substitution and it has no
big obstacles (from our point of view), then we should take this.
Marcus
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [discussion] CMS migration (was: svn migration plan)
Posted by Peter Kovacs <Pe...@Apache.org>.
Welcome back George,
yes I have not forgotten your work. I do hope you continue. I am really
happy on your post.
I liked your proposal for the new design. I would really like to see
that they move into our "production".
The only thing is that in my opinion the static side generator does not
fit to the 2 wikis, to bugzilla and to our maybe hopefully soon
returning OpenGrok instance.
What I would opt for that we are able to move all written content into
one single cms that also works like a wiki. However it is more important
that we move away from the old cms.
So if you guys think we should go for a page gen then lets go on this
journey.
I am in full support for a redesign. I usually get lost in our
materials. I would so much like to see a improvement on our material. I
also tried to motivate new people but I did not manage to accompany them
enough. So I am really sad it did not work.
All the best
Peter
On 29.07.19 10:17, George Karalis wrote:
> Hello Peter,
>
> I have proposed some time ago the move to a static site generator — like Jekyll, Hugo etc. —
> as I was redesigning OpenOffice’s front-page. That would greatly help reduce tech diversity
> and maintenance as only static html files will be served.
>
> Most static site generators work with markdown and I believe that content writers won't have
> a problem working with markdown. We could also setup an automated build pipeline that
> serves the generated site with every commit, i.e. every markdown or template change.
>
> By the way there's a fully functional redesigned front-page for anyone interested, that time
> there was a server migration and it hadn't got much attention. The CMS migration provides an
> opportunity to move to a whole website redesign.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [discussion] CMS migration
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
Thanks Matthias...
I didn't know if the control over publishing with --
https://cms.apache.org/
still worked or not.
I will investigate on my own soon.
On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 11:38 AM Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>
wrote:
> Hi Kay,
>
> Am 31.07.19 um 23:49 schrieb Kay Schenk:
> > Hi all.
> > A few questions --
> > * what's the status of the current OO website repositories -- both
> > https://openoffice.apache.org/ and https://www.openoffice.org/
> > in terms of updates? Are they both, as of today, still svn checkout?
>
> It is still functional for both sites...
>
> However the staging does not work on https://openoffice.apache.org/ due
> to the permanent https redirection.
> But I can live with that... ;-)
>
> >
> > * and since the CMS is broken (?), do updates to through svn go live
> > instantly or ????
> I did a commit yesterday, all went fine (but did not publish yet).
> >
> > * where are the instructions for the new "tool"?
>
> We are still discussing about a new system at the moment.
>
> Regards,
>
> Matthias
>
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 4:29 PM Dave Fisher <wa...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>> On Jul 30, 2019, at 3:29 PM, Peter Kovacs <Pe...@Apache.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 31.07.19 00:18, Matthias Seidel wrote
> >>>>> I don't understand:
> >>>>> Why is migration necessary at all?
> >>>> I already told you on users-de@. ASF Infra can not support the old
> >> (self
> >>>> baked) CMS anymore.
> >>> they replace it with another self baked solution... :/
> >> No, they prefer Pelican: https://github.com/getpelican/pelican it will
> >> support Github’s markdown and allow the preview of content within
> GitHub.
> >>
> >> "the pelican setup sees the commit to master, builds the site, pushes to
> >> the asf-site branch, which the gitpubsub sees, and pulls that change to
> the
> >> active website"
> >>
> >> There will be two major challenges.
> >>
> >> (1) Creating our theme so that we continue to handle the NL translated
> >> elements in the header. An example page theme template is quite similar
> to
> >> what the CMS uses:
> >>
> https://github.com/getpelican/pelican/blob/master/pelican/themes/notmyidea/templates/page.html
> >> (2) How to adapt the legacy html into the new template.
> >>
> >> I plan to help, but only after ApacheCon NA. If someone else starts the
> >> process then I would gladly review and discuss.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Dave
> >>
> >>> With less overhead maybe.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >>>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >>
> >>
>
>
--
"And in the end, only kindness matters."
-- Jewel, "Hands"
________________________________________
MzK
Re: [discussion] CMS migration
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Hi Kay,
Am 31.07.19 um 23:49 schrieb Kay Schenk:
> Hi all.
> A few questions --
> * what's the status of the current OO website repositories -- both
> https://openoffice.apache.org/ and https://www.openoffice.org/
> in terms of updates? Are they both, as of today, still svn checkout?
It is still functional for both sites...
However the staging does not work on https://openoffice.apache.org/ due
to the permanent https redirection.
But I can live with that... ;-)
>
> * and since the CMS is broken (?), do updates to through svn go live
> instantly or ????
I did a commit yesterday, all went fine (but did not publish yet).
>
> * where are the instructions for the new "tool"?
We are still discussing about a new system at the moment.
Regards,
Matthias
>
> Thanks.
>
> On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 4:29 PM Dave Fisher <wa...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>> On Jul 30, 2019, at 3:29 PM, Peter Kovacs <Pe...@Apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 31.07.19 00:18, Matthias Seidel wrote
>>>>> I don't understand:
>>>>> Why is migration necessary at all?
>>>> I already told you on users-de@. ASF Infra can not support the old
>> (self
>>>> baked) CMS anymore.
>>> they replace it with another self baked solution... :/
>> No, they prefer Pelican: https://github.com/getpelican/pelican it will
>> support Github’s markdown and allow the preview of content within GitHub.
>>
>> "the pelican setup sees the commit to master, builds the site, pushes to
>> the asf-site branch, which the gitpubsub sees, and pulls that change to the
>> active website"
>>
>> There will be two major challenges.
>>
>> (1) Creating our theme so that we continue to handle the NL translated
>> elements in the header. An example page theme template is quite similar to
>> what the CMS uses:
>> https://github.com/getpelican/pelican/blob/master/pelican/themes/notmyidea/templates/page.html
>> (2) How to adapt the legacy html into the new template.
>>
>> I plan to help, but only after ApacheCon NA. If someone else starts the
>> process then I would gladly review and discuss.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>>
>>> With less overhead maybe.
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
Re: [discussion] CMS migration
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
Hi all.
A few questions --
* what's the status of the current OO website repositories -- both
https://openoffice.apache.org/ and https://www.openoffice.org/
in terms of updates? Are they both, as of today, still svn checkout?
* and since the CMS is broken (?), do updates to through svn go live
instantly or ????
* where are the instructions for the new "tool"?
Thanks.
On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 4:29 PM Dave Fisher <wa...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
> > On Jul 30, 2019, at 3:29 PM, Peter Kovacs <Pe...@Apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 31.07.19 00:18, Matthias Seidel wrote
> >>> I don't understand:
> >>> Why is migration necessary at all?
> >> I already told you on users-de@. ASF Infra can not support the old
> (self
> >> baked) CMS anymore.
> >
> > they replace it with another self baked solution... :/
>
> No, they prefer Pelican: https://github.com/getpelican/pelican it will
> support Github’s markdown and allow the preview of content within GitHub.
>
> "the pelican setup sees the commit to master, builds the site, pushes to
> the asf-site branch, which the gitpubsub sees, and pulls that change to the
> active website"
>
> There will be two major challenges.
>
> (1) Creating our theme so that we continue to handle the NL translated
> elements in the header. An example page theme template is quite similar to
> what the CMS uses:
> https://github.com/getpelican/pelican/blob/master/pelican/themes/notmyidea/templates/page.html
> (2) How to adapt the legacy html into the new template.
>
> I plan to help, but only after ApacheCon NA. If someone else starts the
> process then I would gladly review and discuss.
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
> >
> > With less overhead maybe.
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
--
"And in the end, only kindness matters."
-- Jewel, "Hands"
________________________________________
MzK
Re: [discussion] CMS migration
Posted by Peter Kovacs <Pe...@Apache.org>.
On 31.07.19 01:29, Dave Fisher wrote:
>> they replace it with another self baked solution... :/
> No, they prefer Pelican: https://github.com/getpelican/pelican it will support Github’s markdown and allow the preview of content within GitHub.
>
Hmm sorry, I thought for some reason that they are still in development
of the tool, But then we can start! So no waiting. :)
Dave, Raphael do you have may be time to Mentor George? - Would be cool
if we can make him a new committer.
@ Raphael: Would be very nice to see you more active again.
All the best
Peter
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [discussion] CMS migration
Posted by Dave Fisher <wa...@apache.org>.
> On Jul 30, 2019, at 3:29 PM, Peter Kovacs <Pe...@Apache.org> wrote:
>
>
> On 31.07.19 00:18, Matthias Seidel wrote
>>> I don't understand:
>>> Why is migration necessary at all?
>> I already told you on users-de@. ASF Infra can not support the old (self
>> baked) CMS anymore.
>
> they replace it with another self baked solution... :/
No, they prefer Pelican: https://github.com/getpelican/pelican it will support Github’s markdown and allow the preview of content within GitHub.
"the pelican setup sees the commit to master, builds the site, pushes to the asf-site branch, which the gitpubsub sees, and pulls that change to the active website"
There will be two major challenges.
(1) Creating our theme so that we continue to handle the NL translated elements in the header. An example page theme template is quite similar to what the CMS uses: https://github.com/getpelican/pelican/blob/master/pelican/themes/notmyidea/templates/page.html
(2) How to adapt the legacy html into the new template.
I plan to help, but only after ApacheCon NA. If someone else starts the process then I would gladly review and discuss.
Regards,
Dave
>
> With less overhead maybe.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [discussion] CMS migration
Posted by Peter Kovacs <Pe...@Apache.org>.
On 31.07.19 00:18, Matthias Seidel wrote
>> I don't understand:
>> Why is migration necessary at all?
> I already told you on users-de@. ASF Infra can not support the old (self
> baked) CMS anymore.
they replace it with another self baked solution... :/
With less overhead maybe.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
RE: [discussion] CMS migration
Posted by Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>.
Hello Mathias,
> From: Matthias Seidel [mailto:matthias.seidel@hamburg.de]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2019 12:19 AM
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [discussion] CMS migration
> > If we make mistakes, the loss of information will be a
> disaster. Not necessarily for the project, but for millions of users.
> > For example, there are (probably) tens of thousands of
> websites that link to pages from openoffice.org. Our goal
> must be to maintain or redirect these link targets.
>
> That is exactly why I tried to start this process years ago.
>
> But you know what happened...
I know what you mean. I thought I was doing the right thing, but maybe I shouldn't have interfered.
> Then it would be the perfect time to help those few people
> that already
> spend so much time on this project? J
I'm sorry, but I don't have time. I understand the importance of the work, but I will not make a promise here that will raise hope, but which I will not be able to keep later.
greetings,
Jörg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [discussion] CMS migration
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Hi Jörg,
Am 30.07.19 um 23:32 schrieb Jörg Schmidt:
> Hello,
>
> A fundamental question first:
> The "CMS migration" won't touch the wiki content? Right?
>
> (i mean: wiki.openoffice.org)
No, Wiki is a different server.
>
>
>> From: Peter Kovacs [mailto:Petko@Apache.org]
>> Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2019 7:58 AM
>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; Gavin McDonald
>> Subject: Re: [discussion] CMS migration
>> I had a quick look at the content. I think we do not need to migrate
>> everything. We should think about reducing the content.
>>
>> So we could try to identify the most important Pages, that are still
>> useful and then make a switch, taking offline everything
>> else, but keep
>> the SVN as archive. If there is interest in the material that
>> we did not
>> migrate we could add a migration request page.
> Sorry, but:
> What you are proposing here is an extremely large amount of work, _work that needs to be done carefully_.
>
> If we make mistakes, the loss of information will be a disaster. Not necessarily for the project, but for millions of users.
> For example, there are (probably) tens of thousands of websites that link to pages from openoffice.org. Our goal must be to maintain or redirect these link targets.
That is exactly why I tried to start this process years ago.
But you know what happened...
>
>
> I don't understand:
> Why is migration necessary at all?
I already told you on users-de@. ASF Infra can not support the old (self
baked) CMS anymore.
> I don't like the fact that programmers here spend time with this discussion (and possibly later with the migration), because the (unfortunately) few programmers we have should concentrate fully on the further development of the program.
Then it would be the perfect time to help those few people that already
spend so much time on this project? ;-)
Regards,
Matthias
>
>
>> @all
>>
>> Maybe it would be nice to make a openoffice.org memorial. publishing a
>> freezed version of what is online today. It is maybe a stupid
>> Idea, but
>> looking through all the stuff, it feels like moving through old times.
> No, that's not a stupid idea. I explicitly support this idea, less as a memorial but rather as an archive and backup.
>
>
>
> greetings,
> Jörg
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
Re: [discussion] CMS migration
Posted by Dave Fisher <wa...@apache.org>.
> On Jul 30, 2019, at 3:56 PM, Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de> wrote:
>
> Hello Peter,
>
>> From: Peter Kovacs [mailto:Petko@Apache.org]
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2019 12:07 AM
>> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [discussion] CMS migration
>
>>>> Maybe it would be nice to make a openoffice.org memorial.
>> publishing a
>>>> freezed version of what is online today. It is maybe a stupid
>>>> Idea, but
>>>> looking through all the stuff, it feels like moving
>> through old times.
>>> No, that's not a stupid idea. I explicitly support this
>> idea, less as a memorial but rather as an archive and backup.
>> thanks Jörg. Archieve or memorial are both fine for me. And useing
>> openoffice.org might be also good for this.
>
> How can we technically copy the web pages (and file attachments)?
> Can this be done directly via the CMS, or do we have to use an offline reader?
>
> I myself made a copy of www.openoffice.org with HTTrack Website Copier several years ago, but the result was not so good.
You can build the OpenOffice.org site on your computer by following the instructions here: https://openoffice.apache.org/website-local.html#setup
These instructions were written initially in December 2011 when I did the initial build locally. Note this is using python 2.
Regards,
Dave
>
>
>
> greetings,
> Jörg
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
RE: [discussion] CMS migration
Posted by Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>.
Hello Peter,
> From: Peter Kovacs [mailto:Petko@Apache.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2019 12:07 AM
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [discussion] CMS migration
> >> Maybe it would be nice to make a openoffice.org memorial.
> publishing a
> >> freezed version of what is online today. It is maybe a stupid
> >> Idea, but
> >> looking through all the stuff, it feels like moving
> through old times.
> > No, that's not a stupid idea. I explicitly support this
> idea, less as a memorial but rather as an archive and backup.
> thanks Jörg. Archieve or memorial are both fine for me. And useing
> openoffice.org might be also good for this.
How can we technically copy the web pages (and file attachments)?
Can this be done directly via the CMS, or do we have to use an offline reader?
I myself made a copy of www.openoffice.org with HTTrack Website Copier several years ago, but the result was not so good.
greetings,
Jörg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [discussion] CMS migration
Posted by Peter Kovacs <Pe...@Apache.org>.
On 30.07.19 23:32, Jörg Schmidt wrote:
> Hello,
>
> A fundamental question first:
> The "CMS migration" won't touch the wiki content? Right?
>
> (i mean: wiki.openoffice.org)
Not in the focus in this discussion. Personally I would like to. But
this is a huge amount of work too. And not something we should target now.
>> I had a quick look at the content. I think we do not need to migrate
>> everything. We should think about reducing the content.
>>
>> So we could try to identify the most important Pages, that are still
>> useful and then make a switch, taking offline everything
>> else, but keep
>> the SVN as archive. If there is interest in the material that
>> we did not
>> migrate we could add a migration request page.
> Sorry, but:
> What you are proposing here is an extremely large amount of work, _work that needs to be done carefully_.
I think we are all clear on this. Thats why I try to chop it into
smaller parts so we can work sometimes on it. And have some sort of
natural selection.
>
> If we make mistakes, the loss of information will be a disaster. Not necessarily for the project, but for millions of users.
> For example, there are (probably) tens of thousands of websites that link to pages from openoffice.org. Our goal must be to maintain or redirect these link targets.
If we want to stay alive we need to be able to break eggs. So if we have
room to do this it is fine, if not it is bad. Imho the freezed version
for openoffice.org might counter your concern.
>
>
> I don't understand:
> Why is migration necessary at all?
> I don't like the fact that programmers here spend time with this discussion (and possibly later with the migration), because the (unfortunately) few programmers we have should concentrate fully on the further development of the program.
The Software that drives our CMs is at end of live. We need replace it
with something that is still alive.
>
>> @all
>>
>> Maybe it would be nice to make a openoffice.org memorial. publishing a
>> freezed version of what is online today. It is maybe a stupid
>> Idea, but
>> looking through all the stuff, it feels like moving through old times.
> No, that's not a stupid idea. I explicitly support this idea, less as a memorial but rather as an archive and backup.
thanks Jörg. Archieve or memorial are both fine for me. And useing
openoffice.org might be also good for this.
>
>
>
> greetings,
> Jörg
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
RE: [discussion] CMS migration
Posted by Jörg Schmidt <jo...@j-m-schmidt.de>.
Hello,
A fundamental question first:
The "CMS migration" won't touch the wiki content? Right?
(i mean: wiki.openoffice.org)
> From: Peter Kovacs [mailto:Petko@Apache.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2019 7:58 AM
> To: dev@openoffice.apache.org; Gavin McDonald
> Subject: Re: [discussion] CMS migration
> I had a quick look at the content. I think we do not need to migrate
> everything. We should think about reducing the content.
>
> So we could try to identify the most important Pages, that are still
> useful and then make a switch, taking offline everything
> else, but keep
> the SVN as archive. If there is interest in the material that
> we did not
> migrate we could add a migration request page.
Sorry, but:
What you are proposing here is an extremely large amount of work, _work that needs to be done carefully_.
If we make mistakes, the loss of information will be a disaster. Not necessarily for the project, but for millions of users.
For example, there are (probably) tens of thousands of websites that link to pages from openoffice.org. Our goal must be to maintain or redirect these link targets.
I don't understand:
Why is migration necessary at all?
I don't like the fact that programmers here spend time with this discussion (and possibly later with the migration), because the (unfortunately) few programmers we have should concentrate fully on the further development of the program.
> @all
>
> Maybe it would be nice to make a openoffice.org memorial. publishing a
> freezed version of what is online today. It is maybe a stupid
> Idea, but
> looking through all the stuff, it feels like moving through old times.
No, that's not a stupid idea. I explicitly support this idea, less as a memorial but rather as an archive and backup.
greetings,
Jörg
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [discussion] CMS migration
Posted by Peter Kovacs <Pe...@Apache.org>.
On 29.07.19 21:11, Dave Fisher wrote:
>
> Please proceed with small examples and test with other languages. The whole of OpenOffice.org is large - aka 9GB. There are decisions to make as we go along.
>
> Someone needs to make a roadmap for OpenOffice.org. Someone needs to understand how the current CMS version ACTUALLY works. I’ll answer questions, but I’m not looking at it until after Apachecon.
>
> Regards,
> Dave
I had a quick look at the content. I think we do not need to migrate
everything. We should think about reducing the content.
So we could try to identify the most important Pages, that are still
useful and then make a switch, taking offline everything else, but keep
the SVN as archive. If there is interest in the material that we did not
migrate we could add a migration request page.
then we could focus on the most important stuff. replace those with
something new. Make the switch, and then continue migrating while the
infra switches off the old CMS infra structure.
@Gav would that be something we can technically do?
@all do you think such an approach would save work? not that we end up
in still migrate a lot of the content?
@all
Maybe it would be nice to make a openoffice.org memorial. publishing a
freezed version of what is online today. It is maybe a stupid Idea, but
looking through all the stuff, it feels like moving through old times.
All the best
Peter
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [discussion] CMS migration
Posted by Dave Fisher <wa...@apache.org>.
> On Jul 29, 2019, at 12:08 PM, Peter Kovacs <Pe...@Apache.org> wrote:
>
>
> On 29.07.19 21:06, Marcus wrote:
>>
>> that sounds very good.
>>
>> Yes, please give us a note when it's finished (or ready for a serious
>> beta test) and how to use it. Then we can test a bit.
Please proceed with small examples and test with other languages. The whole of OpenOffice.org is large - aka 9GB. There are decisions to make as we go along.
Someone needs to make a roadmap for OpenOffice.org. Someone needs to understand how the current CMS version ACTUALLY works. I’ll answer questions, but I’m not looking at it until after Apachecon.
Regards,
Dave
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>>
> The infra page is already on the site. I would opt if we want to go this
> rout that we start now. Even if it is not completly done.
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [discussion] CMS migration
Posted by George Karalis <th...@gmail.com>.
Hi all,
Just so you know, whatever you decide am willing to help with the migration
> On 29 Jul 2019, at 22:08, Peter Kovacs <Pe...@Apache.org> wrote:
>
>
> On 29.07.19 21:06, Marcus wrote:
>>
>> that sounds very good.
>>
>> Yes, please give us a note when it's finished (or ready for a serious
>> beta test) and how to use it. Then we can test a bit.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>>
> The infra page is already on the site. I would opt if we want to go this
> rout that we start now. Even if it is not completly done.
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [discussion] CMS migration
Posted by Peter Kovacs <Pe...@Apache.org>.
On 29.07.19 21:06, Marcus wrote:
>
> that sounds very good.
>
> Yes, please give us a note when it's finished (or ready for a serious
> beta test) and how to use it. Then we can test a bit.
>
> Thanks
>
> Marcus
>
>
The infra page is already on the site. I would opt if we want to go this
rout that we start now. Even if it is not completly done.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [discussion] CMS migration
Posted by Marcus <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 29.07.19 um 10:48 schrieb Gavin McDonald:
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 9:18 AM George Karalis <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I have proposed some time ago the move to a static site generator — like
> Jekyll, Hugo etc. —
>> as I was redesigning OpenOffice’s front-page. That would greatly help
> reduce tech diversity
>> and maintenance as only static html files will be served.
>>
>> Most static site generators work with markdown and I believe that content
> writers won't have
>> a problem working with markdown. We could also setup an automated build
> pipeline that
>> serves the generated site with every commit, i.e. every markdown or
> template change.
>
> Hi George, you have just described almost perfectly Infras replacement for
> the CMS!
> Using Pelican and GHFM and Buildbot, you only need to 'edit' a page in
> Github and that
> commit will trigger a site rebuild and automatic publish of the site. It is
> still in testing but
> almost ready for use. I'll post more details and a docs link when its ready
> for wider testing.
that sounds very good.
Yes, please give us a note when it's finished (or ready for a serious
beta test) and how to use it. Then we can test a bit.
Thanks
Marcus
>> By the way there's a fully functional redesigned front-page for anyone
> interested, that time
>> there was a server migration and it hadn't got much attention. The CMS
> migration provides an
>> opportunity to move to a whole website redesign.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [discussion] CMS migration (was: svn migration plan)
Posted by Dave Fisher <wa...@comcast.net>.
BTW -
A good portion of the site is html as donated in 2011. It is extracted using additional functions in the CMS and then wrapped in the templates.
There is about 9GB content and as the template was developed we hammered the CMS system.
We will need to revisit how we handle NL for the headers. I did the bulk of the work in Dec 2011. No real plans to help until after Apachecon.
Please keep the OpenOffice website in SVN until a Git based framework using new tools is built. Once it is we can do a bulk move which could include html conversions.
Personally, I kind of like the JBake approach used in the Incubator ...
Regards,
Dave
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jul 29, 2019, at 7:33 AM, Raphael Bircher <rb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Gavin
>
> Sounds like a load of work, Especially for the Templates. Does Pelican
> serve HTML and markdown mixed?
>
> Regards Raphael.
>
>> On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 10:48 AM Gavin McDonald <ip...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 9:18 AM George Karalis <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello Peter,
>>>
>>> I have proposed some time ago the move to a static site generator — like
>> Jekyll, Hugo etc. —
>>> as I was redesigning OpenOffice’s front-page. That would greatly help
>> reduce tech diversity
>>> and maintenance as only static html files will be served.
>>>
>>> Most static site generators work with markdown and I believe that content
>> writers won't have
>>> a problem working with markdown. We could also setup an automated build
>> pipeline that
>>> serves the generated site with every commit, i.e. every markdown or
>> template change.
>>
>>
>> Hi George, you have just described almost perfectly Infras replacement for
>> the CMS!
>> Using Pelican and GHFM and Buildbot, you only need to 'edit' a page in
>> Github and that
>> commit will trigger a site rebuild and automatic publish of the site. It is
>> still in testing but
>> almost ready for use. I'll post more details and a docs link when its ready
>> for wider testing.
>>
>> Gav...
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> By the way there's a fully functional redesigned front-page for anyone
>> interested, that time
>>> there was a server migration and it hadn't got much attention. The CMS
>> migration provides an
>>> opportunity to move to a whole website redesign.
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Gav...
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [discussion] CMS migration (was: svn migration plan)
Posted by Raphael Bircher <rb...@gmail.com>.
Hi Gavin
Sounds like a load of work, Especially for the Templates. Does Pelican
serve HTML and markdown mixed?
Regards Raphael.
On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 10:48 AM Gavin McDonald <ip...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 9:18 AM George Karalis <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hello Peter,
> >
> > I have proposed some time ago the move to a static site generator — like
> Jekyll, Hugo etc. —
> > as I was redesigning OpenOffice’s front-page. That would greatly help
> reduce tech diversity
> > and maintenance as only static html files will be served.
> >
> > Most static site generators work with markdown and I believe that content
> writers won't have
> > a problem working with markdown. We could also setup an automated build
> pipeline that
> > serves the generated site with every commit, i.e. every markdown or
> template change.
>
>
> Hi George, you have just described almost perfectly Infras replacement for
> the CMS!
> Using Pelican and GHFM and Buildbot, you only need to 'edit' a page in
> Github and that
> commit will trigger a site rebuild and automatic publish of the site. It is
> still in testing but
> almost ready for use. I'll post more details and a docs link when its ready
> for wider testing.
>
> Gav...
>
>
> >
> >
> > By the way there's a fully functional redesigned front-page for anyone
> interested, that time
> > there was a server migration and it hadn't got much attention. The CMS
> migration provides an
> > opportunity to move to a whole website redesign.
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
> >
>
>
> --
> Gav...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [discussion] CMS migration (was: svn migration plan)
Posted by Gavin McDonald <ip...@gmail.com>.
Hi all,
On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 9:18 AM George Karalis <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello Peter,
>
> I have proposed some time ago the move to a static site generator — like
Jekyll, Hugo etc. —
> as I was redesigning OpenOffice’s front-page. That would greatly help
reduce tech diversity
> and maintenance as only static html files will be served.
>
> Most static site generators work with markdown and I believe that content
writers won't have
> a problem working with markdown. We could also setup an automated build
pipeline that
> serves the generated site with every commit, i.e. every markdown or
template change.
Hi George, you have just described almost perfectly Infras replacement for
the CMS!
Using Pelican and GHFM and Buildbot, you only need to 'edit' a page in
Github and that
commit will trigger a site rebuild and automatic publish of the site. It is
still in testing but
almost ready for use. I'll post more details and a docs link when its ready
for wider testing.
Gav...
>
>
> By the way there's a fully functional redesigned front-page for anyone
interested, that time
> there was a server migration and it hadn't got much attention. The CMS
migration provides an
> opportunity to move to a whole website redesign.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
--
Gav...
Re: [discussion] CMS migration (was: svn migration plan)
Posted by George Karalis <th...@gmail.com>.
Hello Peter,
I have proposed some time ago the move to a static site generator — like Jekyll, Hugo etc. —
as I was redesigning OpenOffice’s front-page. That would greatly help reduce tech diversity
and maintenance as only static html files will be served.
Most static site generators work with markdown and I believe that content writers won't have
a problem working with markdown. We could also setup an automated build pipeline that
serves the generated site with every commit, i.e. every markdown or template change.
By the way there's a fully functional redesigned front-page for anyone interested, that time
there was a server migration and it hadn't got much attention. The CMS migration provides an
opportunity to move to a whole website redesign.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [discussion] CMS migration (was: svn migration plan)
Posted by Peter Kovacs <Pe...@Apache.org>.
On 28.07.19 23:10, Marcus wrote:
> Am 28.07.19 um 21:31 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>> Cms will be shut down soon. The question is how we deal with this.
>> Info is in the chat protocol in my original post.
>
> OK, then we will have a big problem in order to serve our website pages.
>
> Marcus
>
>
There are no deadlines yet. Just whishes on time frame. There is current
a loose target at Infra in 3 month. Lets say november. If we manage to
switch at december we will still be fine.
Infra offers an incompatible replacement suite. Maybe there will be
migration scripts helping us with the migration.
I would like more to move to a easy to use cms system that might help us
to reduce tech diversity and maintenance. I am quite fond of neo (1)
Neo looks interesting since it promises a easy to use front end, multi
language setup of content and the ability to integrate other sites and
resources, while technical relative "easy" maintenance.
Both Ideas sound like promising ways. with pro and cons. I am open for
more ways.
(1)https://www.neos.io/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [discussion] svn migration plan
Posted by Marcus <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 28.07.19 um 21:31 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> Cms will be shut down soon. The question is how we deal with this.
> Info is in the chat protocol in my original post.
OK, then we will have a big problem in order to serve our website pages.
Marcus
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [discussion] svn migration plan
Posted by Peter Kovacs <pe...@apache.org>.
We migrate only code not the cms or other resources.
I have so far not managed to look at the hash topic.
Cms will be shut down soon. The question is how we deal with this.
Info is in the chat protocol in my original post.
Am 28. Juli 2019 20:29:09 MESZ schrieb Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>:
>Hi Marcus,
>
>Am 28.07.19 um 20:12 schrieb Marcus:
>> Am 27.07.19 um 13:45 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>> Am 23.07.19 um 11:08 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>>> Am 21.07.19 um 12:27 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>
>> Hi Matthias,
>>
>>>>> back to the initial discussion.
>>>> Obviously you didn't read my mail until the end...
>>>>> I have created the request. Simply requesting that trunc, branch
>and
>>>>> tags are moved. All other folders should remain as is.
>>>>>
>>>>> I hope this suits everyone.
>>>> Do we have the necessary code changes ready?
>>>>
>>>> We use the SVN revision in our About dialog, and for creating the
>>>> source
>>>> builds. This has to be adapted when we switch to git.
>>>> Using the git hash (short or long) instead? This should have been
>>>> discussed...
>>>
>>> Given the lack of response, this has yet to be investigated...
>>>
>>> Meanwhile my builds on Windows are now done from git. Additionally I
>did
>>> checkout from git on ArcaOS (OS/2) without problems.
>>>
>>> @Marcus:
>>> The switch to git hash (instead of SVN revision) would require some
>>> changes in the logic of our download page. Can you evaluate?
>>
>> I don't see any real dependency between our download webapge and SVN;
>> except with the writen SVN rev. with fixed text on the HTML webpage:
>>
>> https://www.openoffice.org/download/index.html
>>
>> Release: Milestone AOO416m1 | Build ID 9790 | SVN r1844436 | Released
>> 2018-11-18 | Release Notes
>>
>> Can you tell me how a Git hash on our pache servers looks like? If
>> there is no big difference in size, then it should be a problem.
>
>Exactly! There is a short and a long git hash. Which one we choose
>hasn't been discussed yet. We would have to take either one for new
>builds and leave the SVN revision for the old builds.
>
>I just wanted to make sure that we think about such topics *before* we
>switch.
>>
>> *But:*
>>
>> The biggest change is for the CMS. Does it support also Git? If not,
>> then we shouldn't change also the website repo to Git as nobody of us
>> (IMHO) can support this change.
>As I understand it Peter only wants to switch trunk, branches and tags
>to Git, not (yet) the CMS (site and ooo-site).
>
>Regards,
>
> Matthias
>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>>
>>
>>>> BTW: My latest builds are based on a checkout from git, no problems
>>>> so far.
>>>>
>>>>> Please review:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-18773
>>>>>
>>>>> On 21.07.19 01:42, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>>>>> Hi brane,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The threads are linked in my first post.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is for me a workflow thing.
>>>>>> I need a decentral versioning system instead of a central one.
>>>>>> And I want github as public patch interface.
>>>>>> Both do not work with svn.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I add a reason that I heard at work. Young people do not know
>svn.
>>>>>> They expect to work with git.
>>>>>> IMHO it is a dumb argument but in my country the fresh people
>>>>>> from university are dictating a little their working environment.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ahh and git has major pains reading OpenOffice svn repo. So I
>>>>>> can't even use git as a client.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All the best.
>>>>>> Peter
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 21. Juli 2019 01:17:32 MESZ schrieb "Branko Čibej"
>>>>>> <br...@apache.org>:
>>>>>>> Hi AOO devs,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I just stumbled onto this thread. Coming from subversion.a.o,
>I'm
>>>>>>> saddened
>>>>>>> to see you've decided to switch to Git. Could someone please
>>>>>>> summarise
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> reasons for this decision, or give me a link to the discussion
>in
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> mail
>>>>>>> archives? I'd very much like to know if it was caused by some
>>>>>>> specific
>>>>>>> problem or missing feature in Subversion that we may be able to
>>>>>>> address.
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
Re: [discussion] svn migration plan
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Hi Marcus,
Am 28.07.19 um 20:12 schrieb Marcus:
> Am 27.07.19 um 13:45 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>> Am 23.07.19 um 11:08 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>>> Am 21.07.19 um 12:27 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>
> Hi Matthias,
>
>>>> back to the initial discussion.
>>> Obviously you didn't read my mail until the end...
>>>> I have created the request. Simply requesting that trunc, branch and
>>>> tags are moved. All other folders should remain as is.
>>>>
>>>> I hope this suits everyone.
>>> Do we have the necessary code changes ready?
>>>
>>> We use the SVN revision in our About dialog, and for creating the
>>> source
>>> builds. This has to be adapted when we switch to git.
>>> Using the git hash (short or long) instead? This should have been
>>> discussed...
>>
>> Given the lack of response, this has yet to be investigated...
>>
>> Meanwhile my builds on Windows are now done from git. Additionally I did
>> checkout from git on ArcaOS (OS/2) without problems.
>>
>> @Marcus:
>> The switch to git hash (instead of SVN revision) would require some
>> changes in the logic of our download page. Can you evaluate?
>
> I don't see any real dependency between our download webapge and SVN;
> except with the writen SVN rev. with fixed text on the HTML webpage:
>
> https://www.openoffice.org/download/index.html
>
> Release: Milestone AOO416m1 | Build ID 9790 | SVN r1844436 | Released
> 2018-11-18 | Release Notes
>
> Can you tell me how a Git hash on our pache servers looks like? If
> there is no big difference in size, then it should be a problem.
Exactly! There is a short and a long git hash. Which one we choose
hasn't been discussed yet. We would have to take either one for new
builds and leave the SVN revision for the old builds.
I just wanted to make sure that we think about such topics *before* we
switch.
>
> *But:*
>
> The biggest change is for the CMS. Does it support also Git? If not,
> then we shouldn't change also the website repo to Git as nobody of us
> (IMHO) can support this change.
As I understand it Peter only wants to switch trunk, branches and tags
to Git, not (yet) the CMS (site and ooo-site).
Regards,
Matthias
>
> Thanks
>
> Marcus
>
>
>
>>> BTW: My latest builds are based on a checkout from git, no problems
>>> so far.
>>>
>>>> Please review:
>>>>
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-18773
>>>>
>>>> On 21.07.19 01:42, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>>>> Hi brane,
>>>>>
>>>>> The threads are linked in my first post.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is for me a workflow thing.
>>>>> I need a decentral versioning system instead of a central one.
>>>>> And I want github as public patch interface.
>>>>> Both do not work with svn.
>>>>>
>>>>> I add a reason that I heard at work. Young people do not know svn.
>>>>> They expect to work with git.
>>>>> IMHO it is a dumb argument but in my country the fresh people
>>>>> from university are dictating a little their working environment.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ahh and git has major pains reading OpenOffice svn repo. So I
>>>>> can't even use git as a client.
>>>>>
>>>>> All the best.
>>>>> Peter
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 21. Juli 2019 01:17:32 MESZ schrieb "Branko Čibej"
>>>>> <br...@apache.org>:
>>>>>> Hi AOO devs,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I just stumbled onto this thread. Coming from subversion.a.o, I'm
>>>>>> saddened
>>>>>> to see you've decided to switch to Git. Could someone please
>>>>>> summarise
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> reasons for this decision, or give me a link to the discussion in
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> mail
>>>>>> archives? I'd very much like to know if it was caused by some
>>>>>> specific
>>>>>> problem or missing feature in Subversion that we may be able to
>>>>>> address.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
Re: [discussion] svn migration plan
Posted by Marcus <ma...@wtnet.de>.
Am 27.07.19 um 13:45 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
> Am 23.07.19 um 11:08 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
>> Am 21.07.19 um 12:27 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
Hi Matthias,
>>> back to the initial discussion.
>> Obviously you didn't read my mail until the end...
>>> I have created the request. Simply requesting that trunc, branch and
>>> tags are moved. All other folders should remain as is.
>>>
>>> I hope this suits everyone.
>> Do we have the necessary code changes ready?
>>
>> We use the SVN revision in our About dialog, and for creating the source
>> builds. This has to be adapted when we switch to git.
>> Using the git hash (short or long) instead? This should have been
>> discussed...
>
> Given the lack of response, this has yet to be investigated...
>
> Meanwhile my builds on Windows are now done from git. Additionally I did
> checkout from git on ArcaOS (OS/2) without problems.
>
> @Marcus:
> The switch to git hash (instead of SVN revision) would require some
> changes in the logic of our download page. Can you evaluate?
I don't see any real dependency between our download webapge and SVN;
except with the writen SVN rev. with fixed text on the HTML webpage:
https://www.openoffice.org/download/index.html
Release: Milestone AOO416m1 | Build ID 9790 | SVN r1844436 | Released
2018-11-18 | Release Notes
Can you tell me how a Git hash on our pache servers looks like? If there
is no big difference in size, then it should be a problem.
*But:*
The biggest change is for the CMS. Does it support also Git? If not,
then we shouldn't change also the website repo to Git as nobody of us
(IMHO) can support this change.
Thanks
Marcus
>> BTW: My latest builds are based on a checkout from git, no problems so far.
>>
>>> Please review:
>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-18773
>>>
>>> On 21.07.19 01:42, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>>> Hi brane,
>>>>
>>>> The threads are linked in my first post.
>>>>
>>>> It is for me a workflow thing.
>>>> I need a decentral versioning system instead of a central one.
>>>> And I want github as public patch interface.
>>>> Both do not work with svn.
>>>>
>>>> I add a reason that I heard at work. Young people do not know svn. They expect to work with git.
>>>> IMHO it is a dumb argument but in my country the fresh people from university are dictating a little their working environment.
>>>>
>>>> Ahh and git has major pains reading OpenOffice svn repo. So I can't even use git as a client.
>>>>
>>>> All the best.
>>>> Peter
>>>>
>>>> Am 21. Juli 2019 01:17:32 MESZ schrieb "Branko Čibej" <br...@apache.org>:
>>>>> Hi AOO devs,
>>>>>
>>>>> I just stumbled onto this thread. Coming from subversion.a.o, I'm
>>>>> saddened
>>>>> to see you've decided to switch to Git. Could someone please summarise
>>>>> the
>>>>> reasons for this decision, or give me a link to the discussion in the
>>>>> mail
>>>>> archives? I'd very much like to know if it was caused by some specific
>>>>> problem or missing feature in Subversion that we may be able to
>>>>> address.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [discussion] svn migration plan
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Hi all,
Am 23.07.19 um 11:08 schrieb Matthias Seidel:
> Hi Peter,
>
> Am 21.07.19 um 12:27 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>> back to the initial discussion.
> Obviously you didn't read my mail until the end...
>> I have created the request. Simply requesting that trunc, branch and
>> tags are moved. All other folders should remain as is.
>>
>> I hope this suits everyone.
> Do we have the necessary code changes ready?
>
> We use the SVN revision in our About dialog, and for creating the source
> builds. This has to be adapted when we switch to git.
> Using the git hash (short or long) instead? This should have been
> discussed...
Given the lack of response, this has yet to be investigated...
Meanwhile my builds on Windows are now done from git. Additionally I did
checkout from git on ArcaOS (OS/2) without problems.
@Marcus:
The switch to git hash (instead of SVN revision) would require some
changes in the logic of our download page. Can you evaluate?
Regards,
Matthias
>
> Regards,
>
> Matthias
>
> BTW: My latest builds are based on a checkout from git, no problems so far.
>
>>
>> Please review:
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-18773
>>
>>
>> On 21.07.19 01:42, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>> Hi brane,
>>>
>>> The threads are linked in my first post.
>>>
>>> It is for me a workflow thing.
>>> I need a decentral versioning system instead of a central one.
>>> And I want github as public patch interface.
>>> Both do not work with svn.
>>>
>>> I add a reason that I heard at work. Young people do not know svn. They expect to work with git.
>>> IMHO it is a dumb argument but in my country the fresh people from university are dictating a little their working environment.
>>>
>>> Ahh and git has major pains reading OpenOffice svn repo. So I can't even use git as a client.
>>>
>>> All the best.
>>> Peter
>>>
>>> Am 21. Juli 2019 01:17:32 MESZ schrieb "Branko Čibej" <br...@apache.org>:
>>>> Hi AOO devs,
>>>>
>>>> I just stumbled onto this thread. Coming from subversion.a.o, I'm
>>>> saddened
>>>> to see you've decided to switch to Git. Could someone please summarise
>>>> the
>>>> reasons for this decision, or give me a link to the discussion in the
>>>> mail
>>>> archives? I'd very much like to know if it was caused by some specific
>>>> problem or missing feature in Subversion that we may be able to
>>>> address.
>>>>
>>>> -- Brane
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>>
>>
Re: [discussion] svn migration plan
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Hi Peter,
Am 21.07.19 um 12:27 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> back to the initial discussion.
Obviously you didn't read my mail until the end...
>
> I have created the request. Simply requesting that trunc, branch and
> tags are moved. All other folders should remain as is.
>
> I hope this suits everyone.
Do we have the necessary code changes ready?
We use the SVN revision in our About dialog, and for creating the source
builds. This has to be adapted when we switch to git.
Using the git hash (short or long) instead? This should have been
discussed...
Regards,
Matthias
BTW: My latest builds are based on a checkout from git, no problems so far.
>
>
> Please review:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-18773
>
>
> On 21.07.19 01:42, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>> Hi brane,
>>
>> The threads are linked in my first post.
>>
>> It is for me a workflow thing.
>> I need a decentral versioning system instead of a central one.
>> And I want github as public patch interface.
>> Both do not work with svn.
>>
>> I add a reason that I heard at work. Young people do not know svn. They expect to work with git.
>> IMHO it is a dumb argument but in my country the fresh people from university are dictating a little their working environment.
>>
>> Ahh and git has major pains reading OpenOffice svn repo. So I can't even use git as a client.
>>
>> All the best.
>> Peter
>>
>> Am 21. Juli 2019 01:17:32 MESZ schrieb "Branko Čibej" <br...@apache.org>:
>>> Hi AOO devs,
>>>
>>> I just stumbled onto this thread. Coming from subversion.a.o, I'm
>>> saddened
>>> to see you've decided to switch to Git. Could someone please summarise
>>> the
>>> reasons for this decision, or give me a link to the discussion in the
>>> mail
>>> archives? I'd very much like to know if it was caused by some specific
>>> problem or missing feature in Subversion that we may be able to
>>> address.
>>>
>>> -- Brane
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>
Re: [discussion] svn migration plan
Posted by Peter Kovacs <Pe...@Apache.org>.
back to the initial discussion.
I have created the request. Simply requesting that trunc, branch and
tags are moved. All other folders should remain as is.
I hope this suits everyone.
Please review:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-18773
On 21.07.19 01:42, Peter Kovacs wrote:
> Hi brane,
>
> The threads are linked in my first post.
>
> It is for me a workflow thing.
> I need a decentral versioning system instead of a central one.
> And I want github as public patch interface.
> Both do not work with svn.
>
> I add a reason that I heard at work. Young people do not know svn. They expect to work with git.
> IMHO it is a dumb argument but in my country the fresh people from university are dictating a little their working environment.
>
> Ahh and git has major pains reading OpenOffice svn repo. So I can't even use git as a client.
>
> All the best.
> Peter
>
> Am 21. Juli 2019 01:17:32 MESZ schrieb "Branko Čibej" <br...@apache.org>:
>> Hi AOO devs,
>>
>> I just stumbled onto this thread. Coming from subversion.a.o, I'm
>> saddened
>> to see you've decided to switch to Git. Could someone please summarise
>> the
>> reasons for this decision, or give me a link to the discussion in the
>> mail
>> archives? I'd very much like to know if it was caused by some specific
>> problem or missing feature in Subversion that we may be able to
>> address.
>>
>> -- Brane
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [discussion] svn migration plan
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Hi Peter,
Am 21.07.19 um 12:02 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> On 21.07.19 11:42, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>>> 4) As a user I want o be aware how the SVN right management is set. We
>>> had issues with this. This was not the decision in favour for git but
>>> for cWiki. And I add this now, since I do a use case recap :P
>> In fact, it was you having issues with that... ;-)
>> And it was not in the area of our source code.
> yap, but I did and do not understand this. It is just opaque to me.
Simple rule: Do not post private data in public areas.
NO versioning system will stop you from doing this... ;-)
>
> So I am fine to formulate as a user story. And we had the issues with me
> fucking up constantly. ;)
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
Re: [discussion] svn migration plan
Posted by Peter Kovacs <Pe...@Apache.org>.
On 21.07.19 11:42, Matthias Seidel wrote:
>
>> 4) As a user I want o be aware how the SVN right management is set. We
>> had issues with this. This was not the decision in favour for git but
>> for cWiki. And I add this now, since I do a use case recap :P
> In fact, it was you having issues with that... ;-)
> And it was not in the area of our source code.
yap, but I did and do not understand this. It is just opaque to me.
So I am fine to formulate as a user story. And we had the issues with me
fucking up constantly. ;)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [discussion] svn migration plan
Posted by Matthias Seidel <ma...@hamburg.de>.
Hi Peter,
Am 21.07.19 um 11:19 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> Hello Branko,
>
> On 21.07.19 07:24, Mechtilde wrote:
>> Am 21.07.19 um 02:01 schrieb Branko Čibej:
>>> On Sun, 21 Jul 2019, 01:42 Peter Kovacs, <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi brane,
>>>>
>>>> The threads are linked in my first post.
>>>>
>>> Thanks ... Sorry I missed those.
> you are welcome. No issue.
>>>
>>>> It is for me a workflow thing.
>>>> I need a decentral versioning system instead of a central one.
>>>>
>>> Which particular "decentralised" feature do you miss most? For example,
>>> there's work going on to implement client-side shelving (similar to 'git
>>> stash'), it's experimental but available in various forms in the last 3
>>> Subversion (minor) releases
>> Most of the missing features were the reason why Git was developed.
>> As Peter said SVN is centralized, Git is decentralized.
>> With Git you can do your own home branch without publishing for testing.
>> And then you can do a Merge Request (on Github it is named Pull Request)
>> With Git you need one Repo e.g. with the two branches trunk and 42x.
>> With SVN you have two branches to checkout. So you need double space to
>> hold the repo locally for testing
> I am not sure what you mean, you can do a SVN switch <branch path>,
> which IMO does the same thing as you would do in git with git checkout
> <branch>. I would probably clone 2 times with git anyhow. So for me
> there is no difference.
>
> Let me recap as use case description. Maybe it is more helpful.
>
> 1) As a user I want to be able to version my personal changes without
> affecting other developers.
>
> 2) As a user I want to be able to have an intermediate repository, to be
> able to checkout on different VMs in order to do private testing before
> publishing.
>
> 3) As a user I would like to alias commands to my need or whish and
> trade these settings with others developers in m community.
>
> 4) As a user I want o be aware how the SVN right management is set. We
> had issues with this. This was not the decision in favour for git but
> for cWiki. And I add this now, since I do a use case recap :P
In fact, it was you having issues with that... ;-)
And it was not in the area of our source code.
>
> 5) As a user I want to be able to design workflows, for commits,
> triggering tasks. For example review a commit fron annoymous login,
> before commit is done. (The "github" feature ;) )
>
>>> I assume you mean git-svn? I'm not surprised.
>>>
>>> Thanks for taking the time to respond. Looks like nothing short of making
>>> svn just another git would make you change your mind. :)
>> No.
> I have no requirement for SVN to copy git. There are sufficient other
> ways to full fill the requirements i have. And we do initiate the switch
> after 2 years the decision have been made. That should tell you how
> important the switch has been in the last 2 years.
>
> I have no issues in returning to SVN in future. And I hope SVN sticks
> around. I like to have it on work.
SVN will not go away, You will have to use it to access all the other
ASF areas.
We also will have to maintain it for the 4.1.x branch which will stick
around for much longer than I expected.
And now it will stay even longer as a move to git will postpone a
planned 4.2.0 release (my opinion).
Regards,
Matthias
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
Re: [discussion] svn migration plan
Posted by Peter Kovacs <Pe...@Apache.org>.
Hello Branko,
On 21.07.19 07:24, Mechtilde wrote:
>
> Am 21.07.19 um 02:01 schrieb Branko Čibej:
>> On Sun, 21 Jul 2019, 01:42 Peter Kovacs, <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi brane,
>>>
>>> The threads are linked in my first post.
>>>
>> Thanks ... Sorry I missed those.
you are welcome. No issue.
>>
>>
>>> It is for me a workflow thing.
>>> I need a decentral versioning system instead of a central one.
>>>
>>
>> Which particular "decentralised" feature do you miss most? For example,
>> there's work going on to implement client-side shelving (similar to 'git
>> stash'), it's experimental but available in various forms in the last 3
>> Subversion (minor) releases
> Most of the missing features were the reason why Git was developed.
> As Peter said SVN is centralized, Git is decentralized.
> With Git you can do your own home branch without publishing for testing.
> And then you can do a Merge Request (on Github it is named Pull Request)
> With Git you need one Repo e.g. with the two branches trunk and 42x.
> With SVN you have two branches to checkout. So you need double space to
> hold the repo locally for testing
I am not sure what you mean, you can do a SVN switch <branch path>,
which IMO does the same thing as you would do in git with git checkout
<branch>. I would probably clone 2 times with git anyhow. So for me
there is no difference.
Let me recap as use case description. Maybe it is more helpful.
1) As a user I want to be able to version my personal changes without
affecting other developers.
2) As a user I want to be able to have an intermediate repository, to be
able to checkout on different VMs in order to do private testing before
publishing.
3) As a user I would like to alias commands to my need or whish and
trade these settings with others developers in m community.
4) As a user I want o be aware how the SVN right management is set. We
had issues with this. This was not the decision in favour for git but
for cWiki. And I add this now, since I do a use case recap :P
5) As a user I want to be able to design workflows, for commits,
triggering tasks. For example review a commit fron annoymous login,
before commit is done. (The "github" feature ;) )
>> I assume you mean git-svn? I'm not surprised.
>>
>> Thanks for taking the time to respond. Looks like nothing short of making
>> svn just another git would make you change your mind. :)
> No.
I have no requirement for SVN to copy git. There are sufficient other
ways to full fill the requirements i have. And we do initiate the switch
after 2 years the decision have been made. That should tell you how
important the switch has been in the last 2 years.
I have no issues in returning to SVN in future. And I hope SVN sticks
around. I like to have it on work.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: [discussion] svn migration plan
Posted by Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org>.
On Sun, 21 Jul 2019, 07:25 Mechtilde, <oo...@mechtilde.de> wrote:
> Hello Branko,
>
> Am 21.07.19 um 02:01 schrieb Branko Čibej:
> > On Sun, 21 Jul 2019, 01:42 Peter Kovacs, <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi brane,
> >>
> >> The threads are linked in my first post.
> >>
> >
> > Thanks ... Sorry I missed those.
> >
> >
> >> It is for me a workflow thing.
> >> I need a decentral versioning system instead of a central one.
> >>
> >
> >
> > Which particular "decentralised" feature do you miss most? For example,
> > there's work going on to implement client-side shelving (similar to 'git
> > stash'), it's experimental but available in various forms in the last 3
> > Subversion (minor) releases
>
> Most of the missing features were the reason why Git was developed.
> As Peter said SVN is centralized, Git is decentralized.
> With Git you can do your own home branch without publishing for testing.
> And then you can do a Merge Request (on Github it is named Pull Request)
>
> With Git you need one Repo e.g. with the two branches trunk and 42x.
> With SVN you have two branches to checkout. So you need double space to
> hold the repo locally for testing
>
This last isn't strictly true (see 'svn switch'), but it doesn't really
matter; I'm not trying to change anyone's mind, just to understand your
motivation.
Thanks everyone for your explanations. In time, we'll make Subversion so
much better that it'll wipe Git off the map. :)
-- Brane
>
>
Re: [discussion] svn migration plan
Posted by Mechtilde <oo...@mechtilde.de>.
Hello Branko,
Am 21.07.19 um 02:01 schrieb Branko Čibej:
> On Sun, 21 Jul 2019, 01:42 Peter Kovacs, <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi brane,
>>
>> The threads are linked in my first post.
>>
>
> Thanks ... Sorry I missed those.
>
>
>> It is for me a workflow thing.
>> I need a decentral versioning system instead of a central one.
>>
>
>
> Which particular "decentralised" feature do you miss most? For example,
> there's work going on to implement client-side shelving (similar to 'git
> stash'), it's experimental but available in various forms in the last 3
> Subversion (minor) releases
Most of the missing features were the reason why Git was developed.
As Peter said SVN is centralized, Git is decentralized.
With Git you can do your own home branch without publishing for testing.
And then you can do a Merge Request (on Github it is named Pull Request)
With Git you need one Repo e.g. with the two branches trunk and 42x.
With SVN you have two branches to checkout. So you need double space to
hold the repo locally for testing
>
> I assume you mean git-svn? I'm not surprised.
>
> Thanks for taking the time to respond. Looks like nothing short of making
> svn just another git would make you change your mind. :)
No.
Kind regards
--
Mechtilde Stehmann
## Apache OpenOffice
## Freie Office Suite für Linux, MacOSX, Windows
## Debian Developer
## PGP encryption welcome
## F0E3 7F3D C87A 4998 2899 39E7 F287 7BBA 141A AD7F
Re: [discussion] svn migration plan
Posted by Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org>.
On Sun, 21 Jul 2019, 01:42 Peter Kovacs, <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi brane,
>
> The threads are linked in my first post.
>
Thanks ... Sorry I missed those.
> It is for me a workflow thing.
> I need a decentral versioning system instead of a central one.
>
Which particular "decentralised" feature do you miss most? For example,
there's work going on to implement client-side shelving (similar to 'git
stash'), it's experimental but available in various forms in the last 3
Subversion (minor) releases
And I want github as public patch interface.
> Both do not work with svn.
>
> I add a reason that I heard at work. Young people do not know svn. They
> expect to work with git.
> IMHO it is a dumb argument but in my country the fresh people from
> university are dictating a little their working environment.
>
> Ahh and git has major pains reading OpenOffice svn repo. So I can't even
> use git as a client.
>
I assume you mean git-svn? I'm not surprised.
Thanks for taking the time to respond. Looks like nothing short of making
svn just another git would make you change your mind. :)
-- Brane
>
> All the best.
> Peter
>
> Am 21. Juli 2019 01:17:32 MESZ schrieb "Branko Čibej" <br...@apache.org>:
> >Hi AOO devs,
> >
> >I just stumbled onto this thread. Coming from subversion.a.o, I'm
> >saddened
> >to see you've decided to switch to Git. Could someone please summarise
> >the
> >reasons for this decision, or give me a link to the discussion in the
> >mail
> >archives? I'd very much like to know if it was caused by some specific
> >problem or missing feature in Subversion that we may be able to
> >address.
> >
> >-- Brane
>
Re: [discussion] svn migration plan
Posted by Peter Kovacs <pe...@apache.org>.
Hi brane,
The threads are linked in my first post.
It is for me a workflow thing.
I need a decentral versioning system instead of a central one.
And I want github as public patch interface.
Both do not work with svn.
I add a reason that I heard at work. Young people do not know svn. They expect to work with git.
IMHO it is a dumb argument but in my country the fresh people from university are dictating a little their working environment.
Ahh and git has major pains reading OpenOffice svn repo. So I can't even use git as a client.
All the best.
Peter
Am 21. Juli 2019 01:17:32 MESZ schrieb "Branko Čibej" <br...@apache.org>:
>Hi AOO devs,
>
>I just stumbled onto this thread. Coming from subversion.a.o, I'm
>saddened
>to see you've decided to switch to Git. Could someone please summarise
>the
>reasons for this decision, or give me a link to the discussion in the
>mail
>archives? I'd very much like to know if it was caused by some specific
>problem or missing feature in Subversion that we may be able to
>address.
>
>-- Brane
Re: [discussion] svn migration plan
Posted by Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org>.
Hi AOO devs,
I just stumbled onto this thread. Coming from subversion.a.o, I'm saddened
to see you've decided to switch to Git. Could someone please summarise the
reasons for this decision, or give me a link to the discussion in the mail
archives? I'd very much like to know if it was caused by some specific
problem or missing feature in Subversion that we may be able to address.
-- Brane