You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@karaf.apache.org by Andrei Pozolotin <an...@gmail.com> on 2012/08/17 23:49:54 UTC
switch to github
*Jean-Baptiste, and ALL:
*
I am sure you had chance to convince yourself that
git + fork/pull is better then svn + patch.txt
I understand that you have apache guidelines,
but the switch should be easy:
1) treat github as the primary commit source,
require every git pull to contain an apache one liner
" Grant license to ASF for inclusion in ASF works (as per the Apache
License <http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0> §5)"
2) replicate git to svn on schedule via hudson/jenkins job,
if github goes bust - just fall back to svn;
3) continue to produce snapshots and releases from svn
above all else, get an easy access to 500K github java developers
who are just eager to start committing to the karaf! :-)
what do you think?
Thank you,
Andrei
Re: switch to github
Posted by Andrei Pozolotin <an...@gmail.com>.
JB: OK, fine!
I did the magic " git format-patch origin/trunk" and attached the patch.txt
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-1738
lets see how fast does it happen? the clock is ticking :-)
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: switch to github
From: Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
To: user@karaf.apache.org
Date: Fri 17 Aug 2012 05:51:57 PM CDT
> Yes, OPS4J Pax projects are NOT Apache projects, it's the main
> difference ;)
> More over, OPS4J directly use github, not Apache projects.
>
> Really, even using git, just do a git diff and attach (with ASF grant)
> into a Karaf Jira, your patch will be included really quickly (quicker
> than via github for sure).
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 08/18/2012 12:48 AM, Andrei Pozolotin wrote:
>> Jean-Baptiste:
>>
>> 1) last time you accepted my pull request
>> https://github.com/apache/karaf/pull/5
>> you had to re-process it by hand, and it is still not in svn; this
>> is just needless pain!
>>
>> 2) in comparison, after Achim gave me a blessing on my pax-url pull
>> https://github.com/ops4j/org.ops4j.pax.url/pull/4
>>
>> I got my commit back as a snapshot the next day :-)
>>
>> 3) so, the essence of my proposal is this
>> "you are still following apache guidelines, but you use github as
>> primary commit source"
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>> Andrei
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Re: switch to github
>> From: Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
>> To: user@karaf.apache.org
>> Date: Fri 17 Aug 2012 05:07:22 PM CDT
>>> Hi Andrei,
>>>
>>> We are several (it's my case), to already use git (with git-svn).
>>>
>>> For github, we already use it as source, as soon as they contain the
>>> correct grant, compliant with the Apache standard.
>>>
>>> There are already lot of developer that use Karaf github mirror. If
>>> you take a look on:
>>> https://github.com/apache/karaf
>>>
>>> you can see that we have 28 forks, pull requests, etc.
>>>
>>> As you said, we are an Apache project, and so some guidelines. There
>>> are still discussions in the ASF to provide a git service.
>>>
>>> So, be sure that we are following all discussions related to git, and
>>> we already know (and use since long time now ;)) that git is much
>>> appreciated ;)
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>>
>>> On 08/17/2012 11:49 PM, Andrei Pozolotin wrote:
>>>> *Jean-Baptiste, and ALL:
>>>> *
>>>> I am sure you had chance to convince yourself that
>>>> git + fork/pull is better then svn + patch.txt
>>>>
>>>> I understand that you have apache guidelines,
>>>> but the switch should be easy:
>>>>
>>>> 1) treat github as the primary commit source,
>>>> require every git pull to contain an apache one liner
>>>> " Grant license to ASF for inclusion in ASF works (as per the
>>>> Apache
>>>> License <http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0>§5)"
>>>>
>>>> 2) replicate git to svn on schedule via hudson/jenkins job,
>>>> if github goes bust - just fall back to svn;
>>>>
>>>> 3) continue to produce snapshots and releases from svn
>>>>
>>>> above all else, get an easy access to 500K github java developers
>>>> who are just eager to start committing to the karaf! :-)
>>>>
>>>> what do you think?
>>>>
>>>> Thank you,
>>>>
>>>> Andrei
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: switch to github
Posted by Johan Edstrom <se...@gmail.com>.
git-svn works really well....
On Aug 17, 2012, at 4:51 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
> Yes, OPS4J Pax projects are NOT Apache projects, it's the main difference ;)
> More over, OPS4J directly use github, not Apache projects.
>
> Really, even using git, just do a git diff and attach (with ASF grant) into a Karaf Jira, your patch will be included really quickly (quicker than via github for sure).
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 08/18/2012 12:48 AM, Andrei Pozolotin wrote:
>> Jean-Baptiste:
>>
>> 1) last time you accepted my pull request
>> https://github.com/apache/karaf/pull/5
>> you had to re-process it by hand, and it is still not in svn; this
>> is just needless pain!
>>
>> 2) in comparison, after Achim gave me a blessing on my pax-url pull
>> https://github.com/ops4j/org.ops4j.pax.url/pull/4
>>
>> I got my commit back as a snapshot the next day :-)
>>
>> 3) so, the essence of my proposal is this
>> "you are still following apache guidelines, but you use github as
>> primary commit source"
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>> Andrei
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Re: switch to github
>> From: Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
>> To: user@karaf.apache.org
>> Date: Fri 17 Aug 2012 05:07:22 PM CDT
>>> Hi Andrei,
>>>
>>> We are several (it's my case), to already use git (with git-svn).
>>>
>>> For github, we already use it as source, as soon as they contain the
>>> correct grant, compliant with the Apache standard.
>>>
>>> There are already lot of developer that use Karaf github mirror. If
>>> you take a look on:
>>> https://github.com/apache/karaf
>>>
>>> you can see that we have 28 forks, pull requests, etc.
>>>
>>> As you said, we are an Apache project, and so some guidelines. There
>>> are still discussions in the ASF to provide a git service.
>>>
>>> So, be sure that we are following all discussions related to git, and
>>> we already know (and use since long time now ;)) that git is much
>>> appreciated ;)
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>>
>>> On 08/17/2012 11:49 PM, Andrei Pozolotin wrote:
>>>> *Jean-Baptiste, and ALL:
>>>> *
>>>> I am sure you had chance to convince yourself that
>>>> git + fork/pull is better then svn + patch.txt
>>>>
>>>> I understand that you have apache guidelines,
>>>> but the switch should be easy:
>>>>
>>>> 1) treat github as the primary commit source,
>>>> require every git pull to contain an apache one liner
>>>> " Grant license to ASF for inclusion in ASF works (as per the Apache
>>>> License <http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0>§5)"
>>>>
>>>> 2) replicate git to svn on schedule via hudson/jenkins job,
>>>> if github goes bust - just fall back to svn;
>>>>
>>>> 3) continue to produce snapshots and releases from svn
>>>>
>>>> above all else, get an easy access to 500K github java developers
>>>> who are just eager to start committing to the karaf! :-)
>>>>
>>>> what do you think?
>>>>
>>>> Thank you,
>>>>
>>>> Andrei
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> jbonofre@apache.org
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com
Re: switch to github
Posted by Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>.
Yes, OPS4J Pax projects are NOT Apache projects, it's the main difference ;)
More over, OPS4J directly use github, not Apache projects.
Really, even using git, just do a git diff and attach (with ASF grant)
into a Karaf Jira, your patch will be included really quickly (quicker
than via github for sure).
Regards
JB
On 08/18/2012 12:48 AM, Andrei Pozolotin wrote:
> Jean-Baptiste:
>
> 1) last time you accepted my pull request
> https://github.com/apache/karaf/pull/5
> you had to re-process it by hand, and it is still not in svn; this
> is just needless pain!
>
> 2) in comparison, after Achim gave me a blessing on my pax-url pull
> https://github.com/ops4j/org.ops4j.pax.url/pull/4
>
> I got my commit back as a snapshot the next day :-)
>
> 3) so, the essence of my proposal is this
> "you are still following apache guidelines, but you use github as
> primary commit source"
>
> Thank you,
>
> Andrei
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: switch to github
> From: Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> To: user@karaf.apache.org
> Date: Fri 17 Aug 2012 05:07:22 PM CDT
>> Hi Andrei,
>>
>> We are several (it's my case), to already use git (with git-svn).
>>
>> For github, we already use it as source, as soon as they contain the
>> correct grant, compliant with the Apache standard.
>>
>> There are already lot of developer that use Karaf github mirror. If
>> you take a look on:
>> https://github.com/apache/karaf
>>
>> you can see that we have 28 forks, pull requests, etc.
>>
>> As you said, we are an Apache project, and so some guidelines. There
>> are still discussions in the ASF to provide a git service.
>>
>> So, be sure that we are following all discussions related to git, and
>> we already know (and use since long time now ;)) that git is much
>> appreciated ;)
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>> On 08/17/2012 11:49 PM, Andrei Pozolotin wrote:
>>> *Jean-Baptiste, and ALL:
>>> *
>>> I am sure you had chance to convince yourself that
>>> git + fork/pull is better then svn + patch.txt
>>>
>>> I understand that you have apache guidelines,
>>> but the switch should be easy:
>>>
>>> 1) treat github as the primary commit source,
>>> require every git pull to contain an apache one liner
>>> " Grant license to ASF for inclusion in ASF works (as per the Apache
>>> License <http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0>§5)"
>>>
>>> 2) replicate git to svn on schedule via hudson/jenkins job,
>>> if github goes bust - just fall back to svn;
>>>
>>> 3) continue to produce snapshots and releases from svn
>>>
>>> above all else, get an easy access to 500K github java developers
>>> who are just eager to start committing to the karaf! :-)
>>>
>>> what do you think?
>>>
>>> Thank you,
>>>
>>> Andrei
>>>
>>
>
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbonofre@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
Re: switch to github
Posted by Andrei Pozolotin <an...@gmail.com>.
Jean-Baptiste:
1) last time you accepted my pull request
https://github.com/apache/karaf/pull/5
you had to re-process it by hand, and it is still not in svn; this
is just needless pain!
2) in comparison, after Achim gave me a blessing on my pax-url pull
https://github.com/ops4j/org.ops4j.pax.url/pull/4
I got my commit back as a snapshot the next day :-)
3) so, the essence of my proposal is this
"you are still following apache guidelines, but you use github as
primary commit source"
Thank you,
Andrei
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: switch to github
From: Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>
To: user@karaf.apache.org
Date: Fri 17 Aug 2012 05:07:22 PM CDT
> Hi Andrei,
>
> We are several (it's my case), to already use git (with git-svn).
>
> For github, we already use it as source, as soon as they contain the
> correct grant, compliant with the Apache standard.
>
> There are already lot of developer that use Karaf github mirror. If
> you take a look on:
> https://github.com/apache/karaf
>
> you can see that we have 28 forks, pull requests, etc.
>
> As you said, we are an Apache project, and so some guidelines. There
> are still discussions in the ASF to provide a git service.
>
> So, be sure that we are following all discussions related to git, and
> we already know (and use since long time now ;)) that git is much
> appreciated ;)
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 08/17/2012 11:49 PM, Andrei Pozolotin wrote:
>> *Jean-Baptiste, and ALL:
>> *
>> I am sure you had chance to convince yourself that
>> git + fork/pull is better then svn + patch.txt
>>
>> I understand that you have apache guidelines,
>> but the switch should be easy:
>>
>> 1) treat github as the primary commit source,
>> require every git pull to contain an apache one liner
>> " Grant license to ASF for inclusion in ASF works (as per the Apache
>> License <http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0>§5)"
>>
>> 2) replicate git to svn on schedule via hudson/jenkins job,
>> if github goes bust - just fall back to svn;
>>
>> 3) continue to produce snapshots and releases from svn
>>
>> above all else, get an easy access to 500K github java developers
>> who are just eager to start committing to the karaf! :-)
>>
>> what do you think?
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>> Andrei
>>
>
Re: switch to github
Posted by Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>.
Please, avoid this kind of remark. The ASF has rules, infrastructure
requirements, processes. It can appear weight and not always easy, but
it's the way it works.
Thanks
Regards
JB
On 08/18/2012 02:21 AM, Andrei Pozolotin wrote:
> but ASF is merely 3 years behind the times, so - no big deal
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbonofre@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
Re: switch to github
Posted by Andrei Pozolotin <an...@gmail.com>.
*Brian:*
totally agree: real bad-bad-bad "anti-pattern in ASF projects"
but ASF is merely 3 years behind the times, so - no big deal :-)
cheers,
Andrei
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: switch to github
From: Brian Topping <to...@codehaus.org>
To: user@karaf.apache.org
Date: Fri 17 Aug 2012 06:42:37 PM CDT
> On Aug 18, 2012, at 2:11 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>
>> When you are not committer on a project, and you contribute a patch, you have to explicitly grant your license to ASF. To do that, you just mention it by checking "Grant ASF" when attaching the file to the Jira.
> Yes, i appreciate that, but I thought we were trying to clarify whether Github pulls were acceptable means of providing patches. It seems that they are not acceptable for non-committers, so the fact that there are pull requests obscures the fact that those pull requests are unusable and therefore not statistically relevant.
>
> Having said that, it would be good to concretely clarify that Github pulls are not acceptable for non-committers, avoiding any interpretation that Github is a means by which non-committers can provide value to the project. It's important because it is actually very difficult in my experience to get patches applied, which dissuades people from contributing and makes it appear that nobody is interested when there may in fact be many folks interested in contributing but find it too unproductive to do so. These misinterpretations are very damaging to a project since valuable contributions (however small or unimportant to one group) are never made, and folks of a mindset similar to the person who never contributed do not in turn ever start using the project because these features never made it in.
>
> This is very much an anti-pattern in ASF projects, but I've found it pretty common as well, so please don't interpret this as me calling out Karaf in particular.
>
> Brian
Re: switch to github
Posted by Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>.
No we are not for now.
The process has been described, the normal way is to use a patch in
Jira, with grant ASF.
I could change in the future, but for now, it's like this.
Regards
JB
On 08/18/2012 10:13 PM, Andrei Pozolotin wrote:
> Andreas:
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: switch to github
> From: Andreas Pieber <an...@gmail.com>
> To: user@karaf.apache.org
> Date: Sat 18 Aug 2012 12:32:49 AM CDT
>> The process Andrei described is really the best way to get things
>> going tbh since they make the review process for us ways easier.
> great; please review:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-1746
>
>> Besides I think the real problem behind the entire github/pullreqest
>> discussion is the problem that there's no really good
>> jira/patch-based-review combination available at ASF. But
>> independently this is a point which will take another bunch of years
>> to get corrected if you follow the core lists. The entire
>> git/svn/review/... discussion is going on there for years by now with
>> quite some bashing... curious about the outcome :-)
> but karaf project does not need to wait till planetary madness subsides:-)
>
> can you please ask your ASF management, upstream:
> if you simply reverse git->svn replication direction
> and change nothing else, are you still ASF-compliant?
>
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Andreas
> cheers,
>
> Andrei
>
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 7:25 AM, Andreas Pieber<an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> @4) no need for that; once you're through the review process the apply
>>> happens within 24 hours (different time/work zones :-)). BTW, your
>>> pull request is almost through the pipe. Just waiting for two minor
>>> corrections and a new patch at the jira issue to get it in :-)
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Andreas
>>>
>>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 2:33 AM, Andrei Pozolotin
>>> <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> no, I have improvement on that git.html:
>>>>
>>>> 1) do all your work on github mirror via fork/pull
>>>>
>>>> 2) discuss your github pulls on ASF jira
>>>>
>>>> 3) when jira is accepted, do the "git format-patch origin/trunk"
>>>> and attach patch.txt to the jira with ASF grant check box
>>>>
>>>> 4) now pray to your favorite ASF committer to really accept the patch
>>>>
>>>> :-)
>>>>
>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>> Subject: Re: switch to github
>>>> From: Johan Edstrom<se...@gmail.com>
>>>> To:user@karaf.apache.org
>>>> Date: Fri 17 Aug 2012 06:52:45 PM CDT
>>>>
>>>> It is really clear.
>>>> http://www.apache.org/dev/git.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Aug 17, 2012, at 5:42 PM, Brian Topping<to...@codehaus.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Aug 18, 2012, at 2:11 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré<jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> When you are not committer on a project, and you contribute a patch, you
>>>> have to explicitly grant your license to ASF. To do that, you just mention
>>>> it by checking "Grant ASF" when attaching the file to the Jira.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, i appreciate that, but I thought we were trying to clarify whether
>>>> Github pulls were acceptable means of providing patches. It seems that they
>>>> are not acceptable for non-committers, so the fact that there are pull
>>>> requests obscures the fact that those pull requests are unusable and
>>>> therefore not statistically relevant.
>>>>
>>>> Having said that, it would be good to concretely clarify that Github pulls
>>>> are not acceptable for non-committers, avoiding any interpretation that
>>>> Github is a means by which non-committers can provide value to the project.
>>>> It's important because it is actually very difficult in my experience to get
>>>> patches applied, which dissuades people from contributing and makes it
>>>> appear that nobody is interested when there may in fact be many folks
>>>> interested in contributing but find it too unproductive to do so. These
>>>> misinterpretations are very damaging to a project since valuable
>>>> contributions (however small or unimportant to one group) are never made,
>>>> and folks of a mindset similar to the person who never contributed do not in
>>>> turn ever start using the project because these features never made it in.
>>>>
>>>> This is very much an anti-pattern in ASF projects, but I've found it pretty
>>>> common as well, so please don't interpret this as me calling out Karaf in
>>>> particular.
>>>>
>>>> Brian
>>>>
>>>>
>
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbonofre@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
Re: switch to github
Posted by Andrei Pozolotin <an...@gmail.com>.
Andreas:
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: switch to github
From: Andreas Pieber <an...@gmail.com>
To: user@karaf.apache.org
Date: Sat 18 Aug 2012 12:32:49 AM CDT
> The process Andrei described is really the best way to get things
> going tbh since they make the review process for us ways easier.
great; please review:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-1746
> Besides I think the real problem behind the entire github/pullreqest
> discussion is the problem that there's no really good
> jira/patch-based-review combination available at ASF. But
> independently this is a point which will take another bunch of years
> to get corrected if you follow the core lists. The entire
> git/svn/review/... discussion is going on there for years by now with
> quite some bashing... curious about the outcome :-)
but karaf project does not need to wait till planetary madness subsides:-)
can you please ask your ASF management, upstream:
if you simply reverse git->svn replication direction
and change nothing else, are you still ASF-compliant?
>
> Kind regards,
> Andreas
cheers,
Andrei
>
> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 7:25 AM, Andreas Pieber <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> @4) no need for that; once you're through the review process the apply
>> happens within 24 hours (different time/work zones :-)). BTW, your
>> pull request is almost through the pipe. Just waiting for two minor
>> corrections and a new patch at the jira issue to get it in :-)
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Andreas
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 2:33 AM, Andrei Pozolotin
>> <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> no, I have improvement on that git.html:
>>>
>>> 1) do all your work on github mirror via fork/pull
>>>
>>> 2) discuss your github pulls on ASF jira
>>>
>>> 3) when jira is accepted, do the "git format-patch origin/trunk"
>>> and attach patch.txt to the jira with ASF grant check box
>>>
>>> 4) now pray to your favorite ASF committer to really accept the patch
>>>
>>> :-)
>>>
>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>> Subject: Re: switch to github
>>> From: Johan Edstrom <se...@gmail.com>
>>> To: user@karaf.apache.org
>>> Date: Fri 17 Aug 2012 06:52:45 PM CDT
>>>
>>> It is really clear.
>>> http://www.apache.org/dev/git.html
>>>
>>>
>>> On Aug 17, 2012, at 5:42 PM, Brian Topping <to...@codehaus.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Aug 18, 2012, at 2:11 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> When you are not committer on a project, and you contribute a patch, you
>>> have to explicitly grant your license to ASF. To do that, you just mention
>>> it by checking "Grant ASF" when attaching the file to the Jira.
>>>
>>> Yes, i appreciate that, but I thought we were trying to clarify whether
>>> Github pulls were acceptable means of providing patches. It seems that they
>>> are not acceptable for non-committers, so the fact that there are pull
>>> requests obscures the fact that those pull requests are unusable and
>>> therefore not statistically relevant.
>>>
>>> Having said that, it would be good to concretely clarify that Github pulls
>>> are not acceptable for non-committers, avoiding any interpretation that
>>> Github is a means by which non-committers can provide value to the project.
>>> It's important because it is actually very difficult in my experience to get
>>> patches applied, which dissuades people from contributing and makes it
>>> appear that nobody is interested when there may in fact be many folks
>>> interested in contributing but find it too unproductive to do so. These
>>> misinterpretations are very damaging to a project since valuable
>>> contributions (however small or unimportant to one group) are never made,
>>> and folks of a mindset similar to the person who never contributed do not in
>>> turn ever start using the project because these features never made it in.
>>>
>>> This is very much an anti-pattern in ASF projects, but I've found it pretty
>>> common as well, so please don't interpret this as me calling out Karaf in
>>> particular.
>>>
>>> Brian
>>>
>>>
Re: switch to github
Posted by Andreas Pieber <an...@gmail.com>.
The process Andrei described is really the best way to get things
going tbh since they make the review process for us ways easier.
Besides I think the real problem behind the entire github/pullreqest
discussion is the problem that there's no really good
jira/patch-based-review combination available at ASF. But
independently this is a point which will take another bunch of years
to get corrected if you follow the core lists. The entire
git/svn/review/... discussion is going on there for years by now with
quite some bashing... curious about the outcome :-)
Kind regards,
Andreas
On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 7:25 AM, Andreas Pieber <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> @4) no need for that; once you're through the review process the apply
> happens within 24 hours (different time/work zones :-)). BTW, your
> pull request is almost through the pipe. Just waiting for two minor
> corrections and a new patch at the jira issue to get it in :-)
>
> Kind regards,
> Andreas
>
> On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 2:33 AM, Andrei Pozolotin
> <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> no, I have improvement on that git.html:
>>
>> 1) do all your work on github mirror via fork/pull
>>
>> 2) discuss your github pulls on ASF jira
>>
>> 3) when jira is accepted, do the "git format-patch origin/trunk"
>> and attach patch.txt to the jira with ASF grant check box
>>
>> 4) now pray to your favorite ASF committer to really accept the patch
>>
>> :-)
>>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Re: switch to github
>> From: Johan Edstrom <se...@gmail.com>
>> To: user@karaf.apache.org
>> Date: Fri 17 Aug 2012 06:52:45 PM CDT
>>
>> It is really clear.
>> http://www.apache.org/dev/git.html
>>
>>
>> On Aug 17, 2012, at 5:42 PM, Brian Topping <to...@codehaus.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Aug 18, 2012, at 2:11 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>>
>> When you are not committer on a project, and you contribute a patch, you
>> have to explicitly grant your license to ASF. To do that, you just mention
>> it by checking "Grant ASF" when attaching the file to the Jira.
>>
>> Yes, i appreciate that, but I thought we were trying to clarify whether
>> Github pulls were acceptable means of providing patches. It seems that they
>> are not acceptable for non-committers, so the fact that there are pull
>> requests obscures the fact that those pull requests are unusable and
>> therefore not statistically relevant.
>>
>> Having said that, it would be good to concretely clarify that Github pulls
>> are not acceptable for non-committers, avoiding any interpretation that
>> Github is a means by which non-committers can provide value to the project.
>> It's important because it is actually very difficult in my experience to get
>> patches applied, which dissuades people from contributing and makes it
>> appear that nobody is interested when there may in fact be many folks
>> interested in contributing but find it too unproductive to do so. These
>> misinterpretations are very damaging to a project since valuable
>> contributions (however small or unimportant to one group) are never made,
>> and folks of a mindset similar to the person who never contributed do not in
>> turn ever start using the project because these features never made it in.
>>
>> This is very much an anti-pattern in ASF projects, but I've found it pretty
>> common as well, so please don't interpret this as me calling out Karaf in
>> particular.
>>
>> Brian
>>
>>
Re: switch to github
Posted by Andreas Pieber <an...@gmail.com>.
@4) no need for that; once you're through the review process the apply
happens within 24 hours (different time/work zones :-)). BTW, your
pull request is almost through the pipe. Just waiting for two minor
corrections and a new patch at the jira issue to get it in :-)
Kind regards,
Andreas
On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 2:33 AM, Andrei Pozolotin
<an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> no, I have improvement on that git.html:
>
> 1) do all your work on github mirror via fork/pull
>
> 2) discuss your github pulls on ASF jira
>
> 3) when jira is accepted, do the "git format-patch origin/trunk"
> and attach patch.txt to the jira with ASF grant check box
>
> 4) now pray to your favorite ASF committer to really accept the patch
>
> :-)
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: switch to github
> From: Johan Edstrom <se...@gmail.com>
> To: user@karaf.apache.org
> Date: Fri 17 Aug 2012 06:52:45 PM CDT
>
> It is really clear.
> http://www.apache.org/dev/git.html
>
>
> On Aug 17, 2012, at 5:42 PM, Brian Topping <to...@codehaus.org> wrote:
>
> On Aug 18, 2012, at 2:11 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>
> When you are not committer on a project, and you contribute a patch, you
> have to explicitly grant your license to ASF. To do that, you just mention
> it by checking "Grant ASF" when attaching the file to the Jira.
>
> Yes, i appreciate that, but I thought we were trying to clarify whether
> Github pulls were acceptable means of providing patches. It seems that they
> are not acceptable for non-committers, so the fact that there are pull
> requests obscures the fact that those pull requests are unusable and
> therefore not statistically relevant.
>
> Having said that, it would be good to concretely clarify that Github pulls
> are not acceptable for non-committers, avoiding any interpretation that
> Github is a means by which non-committers can provide value to the project.
> It's important because it is actually very difficult in my experience to get
> patches applied, which dissuades people from contributing and makes it
> appear that nobody is interested when there may in fact be many folks
> interested in contributing but find it too unproductive to do so. These
> misinterpretations are very damaging to a project since valuable
> contributions (however small or unimportant to one group) are never made,
> and folks of a mindset similar to the person who never contributed do not in
> turn ever start using the project because these features never made it in.
>
> This is very much an anti-pattern in ASF projects, but I've found it pretty
> common as well, so please don't interpret this as me calling out Karaf in
> particular.
>
> Brian
>
>
Re: switch to github
Posted by Andrei Pozolotin <an...@gmail.com>.
no, I have improvement on that git.html:
1) do all your work on github mirror via fork/pull
2) discuss your github pulls on ASF jira
3) when jira is accepted, do the "git format-patch origin/trunk"
and attach patch.txt to the jira with ASF grant check box
4) now pray to your favorite ASF committer to really accept the patch
:-)
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: switch to github
From: Johan Edstrom <se...@gmail.com>
To: user@karaf.apache.org
Date: Fri 17 Aug 2012 06:52:45 PM CDT
> It is really clear.
> http://www.apache.org/dev/git.html
>
>
> On Aug 17, 2012, at 5:42 PM, Brian Topping <to...@codehaus.org> wrote:
>
>> On Aug 18, 2012, at 2:11 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>>
>>> When you are not committer on a project, and you contribute a patch, you have to explicitly grant your license to ASF. To do that, you just mention it by checking "Grant ASF" when attaching the file to the Jira.
>> Yes, i appreciate that, but I thought we were trying to clarify whether Github pulls were acceptable means of providing patches. It seems that they are not acceptable for non-committers, so the fact that there are pull requests obscures the fact that those pull requests are unusable and therefore not statistically relevant.
>>
>> Having said that, it would be good to concretely clarify that Github pulls are not acceptable for non-committers, avoiding any interpretation that Github is a means by which non-committers can provide value to the project. It's important because it is actually very difficult in my experience to get patches applied, which dissuades people from contributing and makes it appear that nobody is interested when there may in fact be many folks interested in contributing but find it too unproductive to do so. These misinterpretations are very damaging to a project since valuable contributions (however small or unimportant to one group) are never made, and folks of a mindset similar to the person who never contributed do not in turn ever start using the project because these features never made it in.
>>
>> This is very much an anti-pattern in ASF projects, but I've found it pretty common as well, so please don't interpret this as me calling out Karaf in particular.
>>
>> Brian
>
Re: switch to github
Posted by Brian Topping <to...@codehaus.org>.
OIC, yes, it's all right there! Maybe you can point out the parts we were talking about, where the "Grant ASF" button is and all.
That doc assumes someone is a committer. Thanks for the input though.
On Aug 18, 2012, at 2:52 AM, Johan Edstrom <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It is really clear.
> http://www.apache.org/dev/git.html
>
>
> On Aug 17, 2012, at 5:42 PM, Brian Topping <to...@codehaus.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Aug 18, 2012, at 2:11 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>>
>>> When you are not committer on a project, and you contribute a patch, you have to explicitly grant your license to ASF. To do that, you just mention it by checking "Grant ASF" when attaching the file to the Jira.
>>
>> Yes, i appreciate that, but I thought we were trying to clarify whether Github pulls were acceptable means of providing patches. It seems that they are not acceptable for non-committers, so the fact that there are pull requests obscures the fact that those pull requests are unusable and therefore not statistically relevant.
>>
>> Having said that, it would be good to concretely clarify that Github pulls are not acceptable for non-committers, avoiding any interpretation that Github is a means by which non-committers can provide value to the project. It's important because it is actually very difficult in my experience to get patches applied, which dissuades people from contributing and makes it appear that nobody is interested when there may in fact be many folks interested in contributing but find it too unproductive to do so. These misinterpretations are very damaging to a project since valuable contributions (however small or unimportant to one group) are never made, and folks of a mindset similar to the person who never contributed do not in turn ever start using the project because these features never made it in.
>>
>> This is very much an anti-pattern in ASF projects, but I've found it pretty common as well, so please don't interpret this as me calling out Karaf in particular.
>>
>> Brian
>
Re: switch to github
Posted by Johan Edstrom <se...@gmail.com>.
It is really clear.
http://www.apache.org/dev/git.html
On Aug 17, 2012, at 5:42 PM, Brian Topping <to...@codehaus.org> wrote:
>
> On Aug 18, 2012, at 2:11 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>
>> When you are not committer on a project, and you contribute a patch, you have to explicitly grant your license to ASF. To do that, you just mention it by checking "Grant ASF" when attaching the file to the Jira.
>
> Yes, i appreciate that, but I thought we were trying to clarify whether Github pulls were acceptable means of providing patches. It seems that they are not acceptable for non-committers, so the fact that there are pull requests obscures the fact that those pull requests are unusable and therefore not statistically relevant.
>
> Having said that, it would be good to concretely clarify that Github pulls are not acceptable for non-committers, avoiding any interpretation that Github is a means by which non-committers can provide value to the project. It's important because it is actually very difficult in my experience to get patches applied, which dissuades people from contributing and makes it appear that nobody is interested when there may in fact be many folks interested in contributing but find it too unproductive to do so. These misinterpretations are very damaging to a project since valuable contributions (however small or unimportant to one group) are never made, and folks of a mindset similar to the person who never contributed do not in turn ever start using the project because these features never made it in.
>
> This is very much an anti-pattern in ASF projects, but I've found it pretty common as well, so please don't interpret this as me calling out Karaf in particular.
>
> Brian
Re: switch to github
Posted by Brian Topping <to...@codehaus.org>.
On Aug 18, 2012, at 2:11 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
> When you are not committer on a project, and you contribute a patch, you have to explicitly grant your license to ASF. To do that, you just mention it by checking "Grant ASF" when attaching the file to the Jira.
Yes, i appreciate that, but I thought we were trying to clarify whether Github pulls were acceptable means of providing patches. It seems that they are not acceptable for non-committers, so the fact that there are pull requests obscures the fact that those pull requests are unusable and therefore not statistically relevant.
Having said that, it would be good to concretely clarify that Github pulls are not acceptable for non-committers, avoiding any interpretation that Github is a means by which non-committers can provide value to the project. It's important because it is actually very difficult in my experience to get patches applied, which dissuades people from contributing and makes it appear that nobody is interested when there may in fact be many folks interested in contributing but find it too unproductive to do so. These misinterpretations are very damaging to a project since valuable contributions (however small or unimportant to one group) are never made, and folks of a mindset similar to the person who never contributed do not in turn ever start using the project because these features never made it in.
This is very much an anti-pattern in ASF projects, but I've found it pretty common as well, so please don't interpret this as me calling out Karaf in particular.
Brian
Re: switch to github
Posted by Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>.
Hi Brian,
it's not linked to a CLA (even if you have a CLA, you may not grant
license to the ASF ;)).
When you are committer on a project, and you commit, in that case, it
references the CLA: it means by committing that you grant license to ASF
(IP clearance). It's implicit.
When you are not committer on a project, and you contribute a patch, you
have to explicitly grant your license to ASF. To do that, you just
mention it by checking "Grant ASF" when attaching the file to the Jira.
Regards
JB
On 08/18/2012 01:03 AM, Brian Topping wrote:
> Hi JB,
>
> My apologies, this is still somewhat unclear. Are you saying that someone who has a CLA on file can contribute a patch using Github pull? I'm asking because in the past I was told this was not possible, even though I have had a valid CLA on file for many years.
>
> Clearly this does not affect folks who are committers, and while it seems rather opaque on what one must do to become a committer, that's another topic altogether. I'm simply trying to clear things up from my past experience where my Github pulls were rejected.
>
> Thanks, Brian
>
> On Aug 18, 2012, at 1:44 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>
>> Hi Brian,
>>
>> to be "accepted" by the ASF, a patch has to be Apache granted.
>> It means that the author accept the ASF rules and IP convenience.
>>
>> Regarding this, we have two ways:
>> 1/ create a patch (using git diff or pull-request), attach to a Apache Jira, and when attaching, click on "ASF granted patch"
>> 2/ the other way is to add an header in all file of the patch that mention that you grant license to ASF.
>>
>> To be honest, I'm not 100% sure that (2) is valid (I have to ask to the legal team), that's why (1) is the preferred way as explained in the Apache guildelines (http://people.apache.org/~bayard/process-draft.html)
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>> On 08/18/2012 12:20 AM, Brian Topping wrote:
>>> JB,
>>>
>>> I'm kind of confused. When I've submitted patches via Github in the past, I was told that was not an appropriate means to submit them and I had to generate patches and put them in Jira.
>>>
>>> Can you explain this discrepancy?
>>>
>>> Thanks, Brian
>>>
>>> On Aug 18, 2012, at 1:07 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Andrei,
>>>>
>>>> We are several (it's my case), to already use git (with git-svn).
>>>>
>>>> For github, we already use it as source, as soon as they contain the correct grant, compliant with the Apache standard.
>>>>
>>>> There are already lot of developer that use Karaf github mirror. If you take a look on:
>>>> https://github.com/apache/karaf
>>>>
>>>> you can see that we have 28 forks, pull requests, etc.
>>>>
>>>> As you said, we are an Apache project, and so some guidelines. There are still discussions in the ASF to provide a git service.
>>>>
>>>> So, be sure that we are following all discussions related to git, and we already know (and use since long time now ;)) that git is much appreciated ;)
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>> JB
>>>>
>>>> On 08/17/2012 11:49 PM, Andrei Pozolotin wrote:
>>>>> *Jean-Baptiste, and ALL:
>>>>> *
>>>>> I am sure you had chance to convince yourself that
>>>>> git + fork/pull is better then svn + patch.txt
>>>>>
>>>>> I understand that you have apache guidelines,
>>>>> but the switch should be easy:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) treat github as the primary commit source,
>>>>> require every git pull to contain an apache one liner
>>>>> " Grant license to ASF for inclusion in ASF works (as per the Apache
>>>>> License <http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0>§5)"
>>>>>
>>>>> 2) replicate git to svn on schedule via hudson/jenkins job,
>>>>> if github goes bust - just fall back to svn;
>>>>>
>>>>> 3) continue to produce snapshots and releases from svn
>>>>>
>>>>> above all else, get an easy access to 500K github java developers
>>>>> who are just eager to start committing to the karaf! :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> what do you think?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank you,
>>>>>
>>>>> Andrei
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>>> jbonofre@apache.org
>>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> jbonofre@apache.org
>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbonofre@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
Re: switch to github
Posted by Brian Topping <to...@codehaus.org>.
Hi JB,
My apologies, this is still somewhat unclear. Are you saying that someone who has a CLA on file can contribute a patch using Github pull? I'm asking because in the past I was told this was not possible, even though I have had a valid CLA on file for many years.
Clearly this does not affect folks who are committers, and while it seems rather opaque on what one must do to become a committer, that's another topic altogether. I'm simply trying to clear things up from my past experience where my Github pulls were rejected.
Thanks, Brian
On Aug 18, 2012, at 1:44 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
> Hi Brian,
>
> to be "accepted" by the ASF, a patch has to be Apache granted.
> It means that the author accept the ASF rules and IP convenience.
>
> Regarding this, we have two ways:
> 1/ create a patch (using git diff or pull-request), attach to a Apache Jira, and when attaching, click on "ASF granted patch"
> 2/ the other way is to add an header in all file of the patch that mention that you grant license to ASF.
>
> To be honest, I'm not 100% sure that (2) is valid (I have to ask to the legal team), that's why (1) is the preferred way as explained in the Apache guildelines (http://people.apache.org/~bayard/process-draft.html)
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 08/18/2012 12:20 AM, Brian Topping wrote:
>> JB,
>>
>> I'm kind of confused. When I've submitted patches via Github in the past, I was told that was not an appropriate means to submit them and I had to generate patches and put them in Jira.
>>
>> Can you explain this discrepancy?
>>
>> Thanks, Brian
>>
>> On Aug 18, 2012, at 1:07 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Andrei,
>>>
>>> We are several (it's my case), to already use git (with git-svn).
>>>
>>> For github, we already use it as source, as soon as they contain the correct grant, compliant with the Apache standard.
>>>
>>> There are already lot of developer that use Karaf github mirror. If you take a look on:
>>> https://github.com/apache/karaf
>>>
>>> you can see that we have 28 forks, pull requests, etc.
>>>
>>> As you said, we are an Apache project, and so some guidelines. There are still discussions in the ASF to provide a git service.
>>>
>>> So, be sure that we are following all discussions related to git, and we already know (and use since long time now ;)) that git is much appreciated ;)
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> JB
>>>
>>> On 08/17/2012 11:49 PM, Andrei Pozolotin wrote:
>>>> *Jean-Baptiste, and ALL:
>>>> *
>>>> I am sure you had chance to convince yourself that
>>>> git + fork/pull is better then svn + patch.txt
>>>>
>>>> I understand that you have apache guidelines,
>>>> but the switch should be easy:
>>>>
>>>> 1) treat github as the primary commit source,
>>>> require every git pull to contain an apache one liner
>>>> " Grant license to ASF for inclusion in ASF works (as per the Apache
>>>> License <http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0>§5)"
>>>>
>>>> 2) replicate git to svn on schedule via hudson/jenkins job,
>>>> if github goes bust - just fall back to svn;
>>>>
>>>> 3) continue to produce snapshots and releases from svn
>>>>
>>>> above all else, get an easy access to 500K github java developers
>>>> who are just eager to start committing to the karaf! :-)
>>>>
>>>> what do you think?
>>>>
>>>> Thank you,
>>>>
>>>> Andrei
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>>> jbonofre@apache.org
>>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>
>
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> jbonofre@apache.org
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com
Re: switch to github
Posted by Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>.
Hi Brian,
to be "accepted" by the ASF, a patch has to be Apache granted.
It means that the author accept the ASF rules and IP convenience.
Regarding this, we have two ways:
1/ create a patch (using git diff or pull-request), attach to a Apache
Jira, and when attaching, click on "ASF granted patch"
2/ the other way is to add an header in all file of the patch that
mention that you grant license to ASF.
To be honest, I'm not 100% sure that (2) is valid (I have to ask to the
legal team), that's why (1) is the preferred way as explained in the
Apache guildelines (http://people.apache.org/~bayard/process-draft.html)
Regards
JB
On 08/18/2012 12:20 AM, Brian Topping wrote:
> JB,
>
> I'm kind of confused. When I've submitted patches via Github in the past, I was told that was not an appropriate means to submit them and I had to generate patches and put them in Jira.
>
> Can you explain this discrepancy?
>
> Thanks, Brian
>
> On Aug 18, 2012, at 1:07 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
>
>> Hi Andrei,
>>
>> We are several (it's my case), to already use git (with git-svn).
>>
>> For github, we already use it as source, as soon as they contain the correct grant, compliant with the Apache standard.
>>
>> There are already lot of developer that use Karaf github mirror. If you take a look on:
>> https://github.com/apache/karaf
>>
>> you can see that we have 28 forks, pull requests, etc.
>>
>> As you said, we are an Apache project, and so some guidelines. There are still discussions in the ASF to provide a git service.
>>
>> So, be sure that we are following all discussions related to git, and we already know (and use since long time now ;)) that git is much appreciated ;)
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>> On 08/17/2012 11:49 PM, Andrei Pozolotin wrote:
>>> *Jean-Baptiste, and ALL:
>>> *
>>> I am sure you had chance to convince yourself that
>>> git + fork/pull is better then svn + patch.txt
>>>
>>> I understand that you have apache guidelines,
>>> but the switch should be easy:
>>>
>>> 1) treat github as the primary commit source,
>>> require every git pull to contain an apache one liner
>>> " Grant license to ASF for inclusion in ASF works (as per the Apache
>>> License <http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0>§5)"
>>>
>>> 2) replicate git to svn on schedule via hudson/jenkins job,
>>> if github goes bust - just fall back to svn;
>>>
>>> 3) continue to produce snapshots and releases from svn
>>>
>>> above all else, get an easy access to 500K github java developers
>>> who are just eager to start committing to the karaf! :-)
>>>
>>> what do you think?
>>>
>>> Thank you,
>>>
>>> Andrei
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
>> jbonofre@apache.org
>> http://blog.nanthrax.net
>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbonofre@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com
Re: switch to github
Posted by Brian Topping <to...@codehaus.org>.
JB,
I'm kind of confused. When I've submitted patches via Github in the past, I was told that was not an appropriate means to submit them and I had to generate patches and put them in Jira.
Can you explain this discrepancy?
Thanks, Brian
On Aug 18, 2012, at 1:07 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net> wrote:
> Hi Andrei,
>
> We are several (it's my case), to already use git (with git-svn).
>
> For github, we already use it as source, as soon as they contain the correct grant, compliant with the Apache standard.
>
> There are already lot of developer that use Karaf github mirror. If you take a look on:
> https://github.com/apache/karaf
>
> you can see that we have 28 forks, pull requests, etc.
>
> As you said, we are an Apache project, and so some guidelines. There are still discussions in the ASF to provide a git service.
>
> So, be sure that we are following all discussions related to git, and we already know (and use since long time now ;)) that git is much appreciated ;)
>
> Regards
> JB
>
> On 08/17/2012 11:49 PM, Andrei Pozolotin wrote:
>> *Jean-Baptiste, and ALL:
>> *
>> I am sure you had chance to convince yourself that
>> git + fork/pull is better then svn + patch.txt
>>
>> I understand that you have apache guidelines,
>> but the switch should be easy:
>>
>> 1) treat github as the primary commit source,
>> require every git pull to contain an apache one liner
>> " Grant license to ASF for inclusion in ASF works (as per the Apache
>> License <http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0>§5)"
>>
>> 2) replicate git to svn on schedule via hudson/jenkins job,
>> if github goes bust - just fall back to svn;
>>
>> 3) continue to produce snapshots and releases from svn
>>
>> above all else, get an easy access to 500K github java developers
>> who are just eager to start committing to the karaf! :-)
>>
>> what do you think?
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>> Andrei
>>
>
> --
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> jbonofre@apache.org
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com
Re: switch to github
Posted by Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>.
Hi Andrei,
We are several (it's my case), to already use git (with git-svn).
For github, we already use it as source, as soon as they contain the
correct grant, compliant with the Apache standard.
There are already lot of developer that use Karaf github mirror. If you
take a look on:
https://github.com/apache/karaf
you can see that we have 28 forks, pull requests, etc.
As you said, we are an Apache project, and so some guidelines. There are
still discussions in the ASF to provide a git service.
So, be sure that we are following all discussions related to git, and we
already know (and use since long time now ;)) that git is much
appreciated ;)
Regards
JB
On 08/17/2012 11:49 PM, Andrei Pozolotin wrote:
> *Jean-Baptiste, and ALL:
> *
> I am sure you had chance to convince yourself that
> git + fork/pull is better then svn + patch.txt
>
> I understand that you have apache guidelines,
> but the switch should be easy:
>
> 1) treat github as the primary commit source,
> require every git pull to contain an apache one liner
> " Grant license to ASF for inclusion in ASF works (as per the Apache
> License <http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0>§5)"
>
> 2) replicate git to svn on schedule via hudson/jenkins job,
> if github goes bust - just fall back to svn;
>
> 3) continue to produce snapshots and releases from svn
>
> above all else, get an easy access to 500K github java developers
> who are just eager to start committing to the karaf! :-)
>
> what do you think?
>
> Thank you,
>
> Andrei
>
--
Jean-Baptiste Onofré
jbonofre@apache.org
http://blog.nanthrax.net
Talend - http://www.talend.com