You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@wicket.apache.org by Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org> on 2014/02/12 08:18:32 UTC
Apache + GitHub step 1
Hi,
Just noticed
https://blogs.apache.org/infra/entry/improved_integration_between_apache_and
We want all of it, right ?!
Martin Grigorov
Wicket Training and Consulting
Re: Apache + GitHub step 1
Posted by Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com>.
Appears to work already!
Martijn
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 10:02 AM, Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>wrote:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-7304
>
> Martin Grigorov
> Wicket Training and Consulting
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Martijn Dashorst <
> martijn.dashorst@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > What do we want? github integration! How much do we want it? All of it!
> > When do we want it? now!
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 8:18 AM, Martin Grigorov <mgrigorov@apache.org
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Just noticed
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://blogs.apache.org/infra/entry/improved_integration_between_apache_and
> > >
> > > We want all of it, right ?!
> > >
> > > Martin Grigorov
> > > Wicket Training and Consulting
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
> >
>
--
Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
Re: Apache + GitHub step 1
Posted by Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-7304
Martin Grigorov
Wicket Training and Consulting
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 9:52 AM, Martijn Dashorst <
martijn.dashorst@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> What do we want? github integration! How much do we want it? All of it!
> When do we want it? now!
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 8:18 AM, Martin Grigorov <mgrigorov@apache.org
> >wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Just noticed
> >
> >
> https://blogs.apache.org/infra/entry/improved_integration_between_apache_and
> >
> > We want all of it, right ?!
> >
> > Martin Grigorov
> > Wicket Training and Consulting
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
>
Re: Apache + GitHub step 1
Posted by Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com>.
+1
What do we want? github integration! How much do we want it? All of it!
When do we want it? now!
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 8:18 AM, Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just noticed
>
> https://blogs.apache.org/infra/entry/improved_integration_between_apache_and
>
> We want all of it, right ?!
>
> Martin Grigorov
> Wicket Training and Consulting
>
--
Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
Re: Apache + GitHub step 1
Posted by Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>.
https://github.com/martin-g/dotfiles/blob/master/bin/github-pr.sh
I'll try it next time we receive a pull request
Martin Grigorov
Wicket Training and Consulting
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 3:09 PM, Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>wrote:
> signing a CLA is for Apache's secretary
> I doubt they will merge your patches :)
>
> I will write the script soon
>
> Martin Grigorov
> Wicket Training and Consulting
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Martin Funk <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> If signing the CLA raises the chance that the author info doesn't get
>> lost, quite some
>> people might be interested in doing so.
>>
>> mf
>>
>> Am 13.02.2014 um 13:40 schrieb Martijn Dashorst <
>> martijn.dashorst@gmail.com>:
>>
>> > As long as the PR is recorded on a wicket.apache.org list (for wicket
>> PR's
>> > of course), it should be OK-provided the patch is small. This could be
>> > dev@or commits@.
>> > It should be traceable on Apache controlled hardware.
>> >
>> > If anyone wishes to contribute often, it would be easier to send a
>> signed
>> > CLA to the secretary. Whgen the contributions continue and become more
>> > contrived, the path to committership is already paved then.
>> >
>> > Note that The Apache Software Foundation licenses the code from you, you
>> > keep copyright on the original-there is NO copyright assignment when
>> > signing and submitting the CLA.
>> >
>> > Martijn
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 9:25 AM, Martin Grigorov <mgrigorov@apache.org
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >> compare to:
>> >> wget http://.../pr/8.patch
>> >> git am 8.patch
>> >> git commit -a && git push
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> both can be automated with some .sh script but GitHub UI is not very
>> >> friendly - it doesn't give you easy way to copy the author's name and
>> her
>> >> branch
>> >>
>> >> I tried once https://github.com/github/hub but it failed too ...
>> >>
>> >> I just haven't tried hard enough ...
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Apache Org says: if the patch is not very big then just the fact that
>> the
>> >> user created PR is enough to give up her ownership
>> >> if the patch is rather big then Apache requires signed CLA before
>> merging
>> >> the code
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 9:13 AM, Martin Funk <ma...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> several steps????
>> >>>
>> >>> git remote add foo <git-repo-url>
>> >>> git fetch foo
>> >>> git checkout -b foo/<branch-witch-patch>
>> >>> git rebase master
>> >>> git checkout master
>> >>> git merge foo/<branch-with-patch>
>> >>> git push ...
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> either way, what is the Apache policy on that? Shouldn't each and
>> every
>> >>> code snipped be signed of to meet Apache Licence????
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> mf
>> >>> Am 12.02.2014 um 21:44 schrieb Martin Grigorov <mgrigorov@apache.org
>> >:
>> >>>
>> >>>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 7:12 PM, Martin Funk <ma...@gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>>> Pull Requests are still not supported.
>> >>>>> But they could be pulled to local and then pushed to the apache repo
>> >> by
>> >>>>> core commiters, right?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Right, but it involves "manual" work in several steps.
>> >>>> For me the easiest way is to add '.patch' to the PR url, download it
>> >> and
>> >>>> 'git am' it. This losses the author info though...
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> mf
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Am 12.02.2014 um 09:52 schrieb Martin Grigorov <
>> mgrigorov@apache.org
>> >>> :
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> Don't get too excited :)
>> >>>>>> It is just about mail notifications and comments in JIRA/GitHub.
>> >>>>>> Pull Requests are still not supported.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Martin Grigorov
>> >>>>>> Wicket Training and Consulting
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Santo Raso <om...@gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Finally!!!!
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> 2014-02-12 9:00 GMT+01:00 Jeremy Thomerson <
>> >> jeremy@wickettraining.com
>> >>>> :
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Yes!
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 2:18 AM, Martin Grigorov <
>> >>> mgrigorov@apache.org
>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Hi,
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Just noticed
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> https://blogs.apache.org/infra/entry/improved_integration_between_apache_and
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> We want all of it, right ?!
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Martin Grigorov
>> >>>>>>>>> Wicket Training and Consulting
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> --
>> >>>>>>>> Jeremy Thomerson
>> >>>>>>>> http://wickettraining.com
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
>>
>>
>
Re: Apache + GitHub step 1
Posted by Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>.
signing a CLA is for Apache's secretary
I doubt they will merge your patches :)
I will write the script soon
Martin Grigorov
Wicket Training and Consulting
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Martin Funk <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If signing the CLA raises the chance that the author info doesn't get
> lost, quite some
> people might be interested in doing so.
>
> mf
>
> Am 13.02.2014 um 13:40 schrieb Martijn Dashorst <
> martijn.dashorst@gmail.com>:
>
> > As long as the PR is recorded on a wicket.apache.org list (for wicket
> PR's
> > of course), it should be OK-provided the patch is small. This could be
> > dev@or commits@.
> > It should be traceable on Apache controlled hardware.
> >
> > If anyone wishes to contribute often, it would be easier to send a signed
> > CLA to the secretary. Whgen the contributions continue and become more
> > contrived, the path to committership is already paved then.
> >
> > Note that The Apache Software Foundation licenses the code from you, you
> > keep copyright on the original-there is NO copyright assignment when
> > signing and submitting the CLA.
> >
> > Martijn
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 9:25 AM, Martin Grigorov <mgrigorov@apache.org
> >wrote:
> >
> >> compare to:
> >> wget http://.../pr/8.patch
> >> git am 8.patch
> >> git commit -a && git push
> >>
> >>
> >> both can be automated with some .sh script but GitHub UI is not very
> >> friendly - it doesn't give you easy way to copy the author's name and
> her
> >> branch
> >>
> >> I tried once https://github.com/github/hub but it failed too ...
> >>
> >> I just haven't tried hard enough ...
> >>
> >>
> >> Apache Org says: if the patch is not very big then just the fact that
> the
> >> user created PR is enough to give up her ownership
> >> if the patch is rather big then Apache requires signed CLA before
> merging
> >> the code
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 9:13 AM, Martin Funk <ma...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> several steps????
> >>>
> >>> git remote add foo <git-repo-url>
> >>> git fetch foo
> >>> git checkout -b foo/<branch-witch-patch>
> >>> git rebase master
> >>> git checkout master
> >>> git merge foo/<branch-with-patch>
> >>> git push ...
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> either way, what is the Apache policy on that? Shouldn't each and every
> >>> code snipped be signed of to meet Apache Licence????
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> mf
> >>> Am 12.02.2014 um 21:44 schrieb Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>:
> >>>
> >>>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 7:12 PM, Martin Funk <ma...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>> Pull Requests are still not supported.
> >>>>> But they could be pulled to local and then pushed to the apache repo
> >> by
> >>>>> core commiters, right?
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Right, but it involves "manual" work in several steps.
> >>>> For me the easiest way is to add '.patch' to the PR url, download it
> >> and
> >>>> 'git am' it. This losses the author info though...
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> mf
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Am 12.02.2014 um 09:52 schrieb Martin Grigorov <mgrigorov@apache.org
> >>> :
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Don't get too excited :)
> >>>>>> It is just about mail notifications and comments in JIRA/GitHub.
> >>>>>> Pull Requests are still not supported.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Martin Grigorov
> >>>>>> Wicket Training and Consulting
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Santo Raso <om...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Finally!!!!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 2014-02-12 9:00 GMT+01:00 Jeremy Thomerson <
> >> jeremy@wickettraining.com
> >>>> :
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Yes!
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 2:18 AM, Martin Grigorov <
> >>> mgrigorov@apache.org
> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Just noticed
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>
> https://blogs.apache.org/infra/entry/improved_integration_between_apache_and
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> We want all of it, right ?!
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Martin Grigorov
> >>>>>>>>> Wicket Training and Consulting
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>> Jeremy Thomerson
> >>>>>>>> http://wickettraining.com
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
>
>
Re: Apache + GitHub step 1
Posted by Martin Funk <ma...@gmail.com>.
If signing the CLA raises the chance that the author info doesn't get lost, quite some
people might be interested in doing so.
mf
Am 13.02.2014 um 13:40 schrieb Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com>:
> As long as the PR is recorded on a wicket.apache.org list (for wicket PR's
> of course), it should be OK-provided the patch is small. This could be
> dev@or commits@.
> It should be traceable on Apache controlled hardware.
>
> If anyone wishes to contribute often, it would be easier to send a signed
> CLA to the secretary. Whgen the contributions continue and become more
> contrived, the path to committership is already paved then.
>
> Note that The Apache Software Foundation licenses the code from you, you
> keep copyright on the original-there is NO copyright assignment when
> signing and submitting the CLA.
>
> Martijn
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 9:25 AM, Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>wrote:
>
>> compare to:
>> wget http://.../pr/8.patch
>> git am 8.patch
>> git commit -a && git push
>>
>>
>> both can be automated with some .sh script but GitHub UI is not very
>> friendly - it doesn't give you easy way to copy the author's name and her
>> branch
>>
>> I tried once https://github.com/github/hub but it failed too ...
>>
>> I just haven't tried hard enough ...
>>
>>
>> Apache Org says: if the patch is not very big then just the fact that the
>> user created PR is enough to give up her ownership
>> if the patch is rather big then Apache requires signed CLA before merging
>> the code
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 9:13 AM, Martin Funk <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> several steps????
>>>
>>> git remote add foo <git-repo-url>
>>> git fetch foo
>>> git checkout -b foo/<branch-witch-patch>
>>> git rebase master
>>> git checkout master
>>> git merge foo/<branch-with-patch>
>>> git push ...
>>>
>>>
>>> either way, what is the Apache policy on that? Shouldn't each and every
>>> code snipped be signed of to meet Apache Licence????
>>>
>>>
>>> mf
>>> Am 12.02.2014 um 21:44 schrieb Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 7:12 PM, Martin Funk <ma...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Pull Requests are still not supported.
>>>>> But they could be pulled to local and then pushed to the apache repo
>> by
>>>>> core commiters, right?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Right, but it involves "manual" work in several steps.
>>>> For me the easiest way is to add '.patch' to the PR url, download it
>> and
>>>> 'git am' it. This losses the author info though...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> mf
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 12.02.2014 um 09:52 schrieb Martin Grigorov <mgrigorov@apache.org
>>> :
>>>>>
>>>>>> Don't get too excited :)
>>>>>> It is just about mail notifications and comments in JIRA/GitHub.
>>>>>> Pull Requests are still not supported.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Martin Grigorov
>>>>>> Wicket Training and Consulting
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Santo Raso <om...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Finally!!!!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2014-02-12 9:00 GMT+01:00 Jeremy Thomerson <
>> jeremy@wickettraining.com
>>>> :
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 2:18 AM, Martin Grigorov <
>>> mgrigorov@apache.org
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Just noticed
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>> https://blogs.apache.org/infra/entry/improved_integration_between_apache_and
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We want all of it, right ?!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Martin Grigorov
>>>>>>>>> Wicket Training and Consulting
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Jeremy Thomerson
>>>>>>>> http://wickettraining.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
Re: Apache + GitHub step 1
Posted by Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com>.
As long as the PR is recorded on a wicket.apache.org list (for wicket PR's
of course), it should be OK-provided the patch is small. This could be
dev@or commits@.
It should be traceable on Apache controlled hardware.
If anyone wishes to contribute often, it would be easier to send a signed
CLA to the secretary. Whgen the contributions continue and become more
contrived, the path to committership is already paved then.
Note that The Apache Software Foundation licenses the code from you, you
keep copyright on the original-there is NO copyright assignment when
signing and submitting the CLA.
Martijn
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 9:25 AM, Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>wrote:
> compare to:
> wget http://.../pr/8.patch
> git am 8.patch
> git commit -a && git push
>
>
> both can be automated with some .sh script but GitHub UI is not very
> friendly - it doesn't give you easy way to copy the author's name and her
> branch
>
> I tried once https://github.com/github/hub but it failed too ...
>
> I just haven't tried hard enough ...
>
>
> Apache Org says: if the patch is not very big then just the fact that the
> user created PR is enough to give up her ownership
> if the patch is rather big then Apache requires signed CLA before merging
> the code
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 9:13 AM, Martin Funk <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > several steps????
> >
> > git remote add foo <git-repo-url>
> > git fetch foo
> > git checkout -b foo/<branch-witch-patch>
> > git rebase master
> > git checkout master
> > git merge foo/<branch-with-patch>
> > git push ...
> >
> >
> > either way, what is the Apache policy on that? Shouldn't each and every
> > code snipped be signed of to meet Apache Licence????
> >
> >
> > mf
> > Am 12.02.2014 um 21:44 schrieb Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>:
> >
> > > On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 7:12 PM, Martin Funk <ma...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >>> Pull Requests are still not supported.
> > >> But they could be pulled to local and then pushed to the apache repo
> by
> > >> core commiters, right?
> > >>
> > >
> > > Right, but it involves "manual" work in several steps.
> > > For me the easiest way is to add '.patch' to the PR url, download it
> and
> > > 'git am' it. This losses the author info though...
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> mf
> > >>
> > >> Am 12.02.2014 um 09:52 schrieb Martin Grigorov <mgrigorov@apache.org
> >:
> > >>
> > >>> Don't get too excited :)
> > >>> It is just about mail notifications and comments in JIRA/GitHub.
> > >>> Pull Requests are still not supported.
> > >>>
> > >>> Martin Grigorov
> > >>> Wicket Training and Consulting
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Santo Raso <om...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> Finally!!!!
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> 2014-02-12 9:00 GMT+01:00 Jeremy Thomerson <
> jeremy@wickettraining.com
> > >:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> Yes!
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 2:18 AM, Martin Grigorov <
> > mgrigorov@apache.org
> > >>>>>> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> Hi,
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Just noticed
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>
> >
> https://blogs.apache.org/infra/entry/improved_integration_between_apache_and
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> We want all of it, right ?!
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Martin Grigorov
> > >>>>>> Wicket Training and Consulting
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> --
> > >>>>> Jeremy Thomerson
> > >>>>> http://wickettraining.com
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> >
>
--
Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
Re: Apache + GitHub step 1
Posted by Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>.
compare to:
wget http://.../pr/8.patch
git am 8.patch
git commit -a && git push
both can be automated with some .sh script but GitHub UI is not very
friendly - it doesn't give you easy way to copy the author's name and her
branch
I tried once https://github.com/github/hub but it failed too ...
I just haven't tried hard enough ...
Apache Org says: if the patch is not very big then just the fact that the
user created PR is enough to give up her ownership
if the patch is rather big then Apache requires signed CLA before merging
the code
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 9:13 AM, Martin Funk <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> several steps????
>
> git remote add foo <git-repo-url>
> git fetch foo
> git checkout -b foo/<branch-witch-patch>
> git rebase master
> git checkout master
> git merge foo/<branch-with-patch>
> git push ...
>
>
> either way, what is the Apache policy on that? Shouldn't each and every
> code snipped be signed of to meet Apache Licence????
>
>
> mf
> Am 12.02.2014 um 21:44 schrieb Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>:
>
> > On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 7:12 PM, Martin Funk <ma...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >>> Pull Requests are still not supported.
> >> But they could be pulled to local and then pushed to the apache repo by
> >> core commiters, right?
> >>
> >
> > Right, but it involves "manual" work in several steps.
> > For me the easiest way is to add '.patch' to the PR url, download it and
> > 'git am' it. This losses the author info though...
> >
> >
> >>
> >> mf
> >>
> >> Am 12.02.2014 um 09:52 schrieb Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>:
> >>
> >>> Don't get too excited :)
> >>> It is just about mail notifications and comments in JIRA/GitHub.
> >>> Pull Requests are still not supported.
> >>>
> >>> Martin Grigorov
> >>> Wicket Training and Consulting
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Santo Raso <om...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Finally!!!!
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> 2014-02-12 9:00 GMT+01:00 Jeremy Thomerson <jeremy@wickettraining.com
> >:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Yes!
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 2:18 AM, Martin Grigorov <
> mgrigorov@apache.org
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Just noticed
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> https://blogs.apache.org/infra/entry/improved_integration_between_apache_and
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> We want all of it, right ?!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Martin Grigorov
> >>>>>> Wicket Training and Consulting
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Jeremy Thomerson
> >>>>> http://wickettraining.com
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
>
>
Re: Apache + GitHub step 1
Posted by Martin Funk <ma...@gmail.com>.
several steps????
git remote add foo <git-repo-url>
git fetch foo
git checkout -b foo/<branch-witch-patch>
git rebase master
git checkout master
git merge foo/<branch-with-patch>
git push ...
either way, what is the Apache policy on that? Shouldn't each and every code snipped be signed of to meet Apache Licence????
mf
Am 12.02.2014 um 21:44 schrieb Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>:
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 7:12 PM, Martin Funk <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> Pull Requests are still not supported.
>> But they could be pulled to local and then pushed to the apache repo by
>> core commiters, right?
>>
>
> Right, but it involves "manual" work in several steps.
> For me the easiest way is to add '.patch' to the PR url, download it and
> 'git am' it. This losses the author info though...
>
>
>>
>> mf
>>
>> Am 12.02.2014 um 09:52 schrieb Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>:
>>
>>> Don't get too excited :)
>>> It is just about mail notifications and comments in JIRA/GitHub.
>>> Pull Requests are still not supported.
>>>
>>> Martin Grigorov
>>> Wicket Training and Consulting
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Santo Raso <om...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Finally!!!!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2014-02-12 9:00 GMT+01:00 Jeremy Thomerson <je...@wickettraining.com>:
>>>>
>>>>> Yes!
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 2:18 AM, Martin Grigorov <mgrigorov@apache.org
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just noticed
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>> https://blogs.apache.org/infra/entry/improved_integration_between_apache_and
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We want all of it, right ?!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Martin Grigorov
>>>>>> Wicket Training and Consulting
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Jeremy Thomerson
>>>>> http://wickettraining.com
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
Re: Apache + GitHub step 1
Posted by Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 7:12 PM, Martin Funk <ma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Pull Requests are still not supported.
> But they could be pulled to local and then pushed to the apache repo by
> core commiters, right?
>
Right, but it involves "manual" work in several steps.
For me the easiest way is to add '.patch' to the PR url, download it and
'git am' it. This losses the author info though...
>
> mf
>
> Am 12.02.2014 um 09:52 schrieb Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>:
>
> > Don't get too excited :)
> > It is just about mail notifications and comments in JIRA/GitHub.
> > Pull Requests are still not supported.
> >
> > Martin Grigorov
> > Wicket Training and Consulting
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Santo Raso <om...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Finally!!!!
> >>
> >>
> >> 2014-02-12 9:00 GMT+01:00 Jeremy Thomerson <je...@wickettraining.com>:
> >>
> >>> Yes!
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 2:18 AM, Martin Grigorov <mgrigorov@apache.org
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> Just noticed
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> https://blogs.apache.org/infra/entry/improved_integration_between_apache_and
> >>>>
> >>>> We want all of it, right ?!
> >>>>
> >>>> Martin Grigorov
> >>>> Wicket Training and Consulting
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Jeremy Thomerson
> >>> http://wickettraining.com
> >>>
> >>
>
>
Re: Apache + GitHub step 1
Posted by Martin Funk <ma...@gmail.com>.
> Pull Requests are still not supported.
But they could be pulled to local and then pushed to the apache repo by core commiters, right?
mf
Am 12.02.2014 um 09:52 schrieb Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>:
> Don't get too excited :)
> It is just about mail notifications and comments in JIRA/GitHub.
> Pull Requests are still not supported.
>
> Martin Grigorov
> Wicket Training and Consulting
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Santo Raso <om...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Finally!!!!
>>
>>
>> 2014-02-12 9:00 GMT+01:00 Jeremy Thomerson <je...@wickettraining.com>:
>>
>>> Yes!
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 2:18 AM, Martin Grigorov <mgrigorov@apache.org
>>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Just noticed
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>> https://blogs.apache.org/infra/entry/improved_integration_between_apache_and
>>>>
>>>> We want all of it, right ?!
>>>>
>>>> Martin Grigorov
>>>> Wicket Training and Consulting
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jeremy Thomerson
>>> http://wickettraining.com
>>>
>>
Re: Apache + GitHub step 1
Posted by Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>.
Don't get too excited :)
It is just about mail notifications and comments in JIRA/GitHub.
Pull Requests are still not supported.
Martin Grigorov
Wicket Training and Consulting
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Santo Raso <om...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Finally!!!!
>
>
> 2014-02-12 9:00 GMT+01:00 Jeremy Thomerson <je...@wickettraining.com>:
>
> > Yes!
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 2:18 AM, Martin Grigorov <mgrigorov@apache.org
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Just noticed
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://blogs.apache.org/infra/entry/improved_integration_between_apache_and
> > >
> > > We want all of it, right ?!
> > >
> > > Martin Grigorov
> > > Wicket Training and Consulting
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jeremy Thomerson
> > http://wickettraining.com
> >
>
Re: Apache + GitHub step 1
Posted by Santo Raso <om...@gmail.com>.
Finally!!!!
2014-02-12 9:00 GMT+01:00 Jeremy Thomerson <je...@wickettraining.com>:
> Yes!
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 2:18 AM, Martin Grigorov <mgrigorov@apache.org
> >wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Just noticed
> >
> >
> https://blogs.apache.org/infra/entry/improved_integration_between_apache_and
> >
> > We want all of it, right ?!
> >
> > Martin Grigorov
> > Wicket Training and Consulting
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Jeremy Thomerson
> http://wickettraining.com
>
Re: Apache + GitHub step 1
Posted by Jeremy Thomerson <je...@wickettraining.com>.
Yes!
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 2:18 AM, Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just noticed
>
> https://blogs.apache.org/infra/entry/improved_integration_between_apache_and
>
> We want all of it, right ?!
>
> Martin Grigorov
> Wicket Training and Consulting
>
--
Jeremy Thomerson
http://wickettraining.com