You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@airavata.apache.org by Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu> on 2014/01/16 20:50:41 UTC
Commit messages, Jira, and version control
Hi all--
We have discussed $subject before for other reasons without much action
[0], so I want to bring it up again. Unless the situation has changed
recently, Apache's Jira no longer links SVN commit messages to Jira
tickets. For background on the issues with SVN, see [1]. This ticket
is still unresolved.
The general linking of repo commits to Jira tickets through commit
comments [2] is a good and virtuous thing. We have lost this in
Airavata and need to get it back. This requires moving to Git [3] [4].
What other consequences are there for doing this? Let's please
discuss. It will take a bit of time from INFRA to make the conversion,
but this doesn't seem to be awful. We need to preserve history if we do
this. What else?
Thanks--
Marlon
[0] https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@airavata.apache.org/msg03881.html
[1] https://ecosystem.atlassian.net/browse/SVN-385
[2] http://www.apache.org/dev/svngit2jira.html
[3] https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
[4]
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20INFRA%20AND%20text%20~%20%22git%20svn%22
Re: Commit messages, Jira, and version control
Posted by Danushka Menikkumbura <da...@gmail.com>.
+1.
There are more important aspects of Git that makes it appealing.
Restructuring the code base is a completely different exercise where using
Git repositories for different modules is just part of it.
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 9:12 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu> wrote:
> My thinking is that we should go slowly and get through the git
> migration first before reorganizing the code base. The code
> reorganization needs more discussion and will have some non-trivial
> consequences discussed below.
>
>
>
> Marlon
>
> On 1/22/14 10:09 AM, Amila Jayasekara wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 6:44 AM, Shameera Rathnayaka <
> shameerainfo@gmail.com
> >> wrote:
> >> Hi Amila,
> >>
> >> see my comment inline,
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Amila Jayasekara <
> thejaka.amila@gmail.com
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> Isn't it good to use separate repository to XBaya? My point is, Then
> we
> >>>> can introduce another GUI client( Web base) and deprecate XBaya in
> future.
> >>>>
> >>> I do not think it is good to have XBaya in a separate repo. There are
> lot
> >>> of common code which XBaya and other artefacts share.
> >>>
> >> IMO as a GUI client, Xbaya only depend on Airavata client api? If not
> >> isn't it better to do this separation? As a result we will end up
> getting
> >> rich client API. WDYT?
> >>
> > There are common code like utils, configurations that both XBaya and
> other
> > artefacts depends on.
> > Again 2 repos mean more work. 2 build servers, 2 release cycles and more
> > dependencies. And so far we didnt encounter issues managing Airavata code
> > using a single repo. Maybe we can consider this when we really face
> issues
> > with a single repo.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Amila
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>> So it is bit tricky how to separate these artefacts into 2 separate
> >>> repos. Also incase if we find a blocker in common code we anyhow have
> to
> >>> release both repositories. So in long term it will be a hassle to
> maintain
> >>> 2 repos. Again Airavata is not a huge code base, therefore working
> with a
> >>> single repository will be easy IMO.
> >>>
> >> Yes i agree with you, if the code base it not huge it is always good to
> >> keep all in one repository. the rational behind above suggestion is ,
> >> Airavata will have multiple GUI clients( XBaya, Web base GUI , etc ...
> ) in
> >> future. IMO server side developer will not works on GUI client code
> >> frequently. But first of all we need to decouple XBaya from server code.
> >>
> >>
> >>> It is certainly good to think about these now. Thanks for bringing this
> >>> Shameera.
> >>>
> >> you are welcome Amila :).
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Shameera.
> >>
> >>> Regards
> >>> Thejaka Amila
> >>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> Shameera.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Actually I responded pre-maturely. I am myself not convinced if this
> >>>>> will help or is needed. Let me withdraw my suggestion and stick to an
> >>>>> opinion (for now) to have a single unified repo. We may want to once
> >>>>> revisit the layout as we get close to 1.0.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Suresh
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Jan 21, 2014, at 9:46 PM, Amila Jayasekara <
> thejaka.amila@gmail.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi Suresh,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I didnt quite understand what you proposed. Are you proposing to
> have
> >>>>> separate repos for "Airavata Services", "Airavata Client SDK’s" etc
> ... ?
> >>>>>> If so I am with Danushka.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Also Airavata is a fairly manageable code base. So I also dont see
> an
> >>>>> advantage having separate repos for each of the sub-components.
> >>>>>> Thanks
> >>>>>> Amila
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Danushka Menikkumbura <
> >>>>> danushka.menikkumbura@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> Suresh,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> IMO, having independent repositories does not really help unless the
> >>>>> components are mutually exclusive and we ship them independently.
> >>>>>> Danushka
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 1:32 AM, Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>> In retrospect, it may be better to make this decision now and have
> >>>>> INFRA create the required repositories at once.
> >>>>>> I kind of liked what Shameera started, just to rephrase:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> * Airavata Services
> >>>>>> * Airavata Client SDK’s
> >>>>>> * Airavata Web UI’s
> >>>>>> * Airavata GUI Tools
> >>>>>> * Airavata Admin Tools
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I am + 0 on this. Not sure if breaking up will reduce clutter and
> >>>>> provide better manageability or will overwhelm.
> >>>>>> Here are some examples, if it helps:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> https://github.com/jclouds
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> And the master ASF repo which is an umbrella for all apache project
> >>>>> mirrors - https://github.com/apache
> >>>>>> Suresh
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Jan 21, 2014, at 2:36 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> For now, I want to keep the same structure with one repository.
> >>>>> Assuming
> >>>>>>> the vote passes, this will be a simple email to Apache INFRA to do
> >>>>> the
> >>>>>>> conversion. We can bring up reorganization separately.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Please let me know if I am missing something, though.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Marlon
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On 1/21/14 2:28 PM, Shameera Rathnayaka wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Hi Marlon,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> do we have any idea about the git repository structure we will
> >>>>> use? all
> >>>>>>>> Airavata code will go under one git repository or we will have
> >>>>> separate
> >>>>>>>> repository to airavata client , airvata server and xBaya? (can be
> >>>>> fine
> >>>>>>>> grain further if needed).
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>> Shameera.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Since this will effect everyone, I will start a 72 hour voting
> >>>>> period
> >>>>>>>>> and discussion thread. Please vote only on the [VOTE] thread so
> >>>>> that it
> >>>>>>>>> will be easy to count. All opinions are welcome.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Marlon
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On 1/16/14 10:51 PM, Amila Jayasekara wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> +1 to move to Git.
> >>>>>>>>>> It seems it is easy for people to contribute with GIT.
> (Specially
> >>>>>>>>>> situations like GSOC).
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks
> >>>>>>>>>> Thejaka Amila
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Suresh Marru <
> smarru@apache.org>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Marlon for resurrecting this discussion. Its also timely
> >>>>> to the
> >>>>>>>>>>> transition before GSOC 14 and as we move towards Airavata 1.0.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> One thing we have noticed is INFRA support for GIT transition
> >>>>> has
> >>>>>>>>>>> increased over time. Also, the integration with GITHUB, jClouds
> >>>>> has
> >>>>>>>>> fully
> >>>>>>>>>>> exploited this and now there may be other projects also. So all
> >>>>> in all
> >>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>> timing is very good and + 1 to move foreword for Airavata.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Suresh
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 16, 2014, at 2:50 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi all--
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> We have discussed $subject before for other reasons without
> >>>>> much action
> >>>>>>>>>>>> [0], so I want to bring it up again. Unless the situation has
> >>>>> changed
> >>>>>>>>>>>> recently, Apache's Jira no longer links SVN commit messages to
> >>>>> Jira
> >>>>>>>>>>>> tickets. For background on the issues with SVN, see [1].
> >>>>> This ticket
> >>>>>>>>>>>> is still unresolved.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> The general linking of repo commits to Jira tickets through
> >>>>> commit
> >>>>>>>>>>>> comments [2] is a good and virtuous thing. We have lost this
> >>>>> in
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Airavata and need to get it back. This requires moving to Git
> >>>>> [3] [4].
> >>>>>>>>>>>> What other consequences are there for doing this? Let's
> please
> >>>>>>>>>>>> discuss. It will take a bit of time from INFRA to make the
> >>>>> conversion,
> >>>>>>>>>>>> but this doesn't seem to be awful. We need to preserve
> >>>>> history if we
> >>>>>>>>> do
> >>>>>>>>>>>> this. What else?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks--
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Marlon
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> [0]
> >>>>> https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@airavata.apache.org/msg03881.html
> >>>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://ecosystem.atlassian.net/browse/SVN-385
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> [2] http://www.apache.org/dev/svngit2jira.html
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> [3] https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> [4]
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20INFRA%20AND%20text%20~%20%22git%20svn%22
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Best Regards,
> >>>> Shameera Rathnayaka.
> >>>>
> >>>> email: shameera AT apache.org , shameerainfo AT gmail.com
> >>>> Blog : http://shameerarathnayaka.blogspot.com/
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Best Regards,
> >> Shameera Rathnayaka.
> >>
> >> email: shameera AT apache.org , shameerainfo AT gmail.com
> >> Blog : http://shameerarathnayaka.blogspot.com/
> >>
>
>
Re: Commit messages, Jira, and version control
Posted by Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu>.
My thinking is that we should go slowly and get through the git
migration first before reorganizing the code base. The code
reorganization needs more discussion and will have some non-trivial
consequences discussed below.
Marlon
On 1/22/14 10:09 AM, Amila Jayasekara wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 6:44 AM, Shameera Rathnayaka <shameerainfo@gmail.com
>> wrote:
>> Hi Amila,
>>
>> see my comment inline,
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Amila Jayasekara <thejaka.amila@gmail.com
>>> wrote:
>>>> Isn't it good to use separate repository to XBaya? My point is, Then we
>>>> can introduce another GUI client( Web base) and deprecate XBaya in future.
>>>>
>>> I do not think it is good to have XBaya in a separate repo. There are lot
>>> of common code which XBaya and other artefacts share.
>>>
>> IMO as a GUI client, Xbaya only depend on Airavata client api? If not
>> isn't it better to do this separation? As a result we will end up getting
>> rich client API. WDYT?
>>
> There are common code like utils, configurations that both XBaya and other
> artefacts depends on.
> Again 2 repos mean more work. 2 build servers, 2 release cycles and more
> dependencies. And so far we didnt encounter issues managing Airavata code
> using a single repo. Maybe we can consider this when we really face issues
> with a single repo.
>
> Thanks
> Amila
>
>
>>
>>
>>> So it is bit tricky how to separate these artefacts into 2 separate
>>> repos. Also incase if we find a blocker in common code we anyhow have to
>>> release both repositories. So in long term it will be a hassle to maintain
>>> 2 repos. Again Airavata is not a huge code base, therefore working with a
>>> single repository will be easy IMO.
>>>
>> Yes i agree with you, if the code base it not huge it is always good to
>> keep all in one repository. the rational behind above suggestion is ,
>> Airavata will have multiple GUI clients( XBaya, Web base GUI , etc ... ) in
>> future. IMO server side developer will not works on GUI client code
>> frequently. But first of all we need to decouple XBaya from server code.
>>
>>
>>> It is certainly good to think about these now. Thanks for bringing this
>>> Shameera.
>>>
>> you are welcome Amila :).
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Shameera.
>>
>>> Regards
>>> Thejaka Amila
>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Shameera.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Actually I responded pre-maturely. I am myself not convinced if this
>>>>> will help or is needed. Let me withdraw my suggestion and stick to an
>>>>> opinion (for now) to have a single unified repo. We may want to once
>>>>> revisit the layout as we get close to 1.0.
>>>>>
>>>>> Suresh
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jan 21, 2014, at 9:46 PM, Amila Jayasekara <th...@gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Suresh,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I didnt quite understand what you proposed. Are you proposing to have
>>>>> separate repos for "Airavata Services", "Airavata Client SDK’s" etc ... ?
>>>>>> If so I am with Danushka.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also Airavata is a fairly manageable code base. So I also dont see an
>>>>> advantage having separate repos for each of the sub-components.
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>> Amila
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Danushka Menikkumbura <
>>>>> danushka.menikkumbura@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Suresh,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> IMO, having independent repositories does not really help unless the
>>>>> components are mutually exclusive and we ship them independently.
>>>>>> Danushka
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 1:32 AM, Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> In retrospect, it may be better to make this decision now and have
>>>>> INFRA create the required repositories at once.
>>>>>> I kind of liked what Shameera started, just to rephrase:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * Airavata Services
>>>>>> * Airavata Client SDK’s
>>>>>> * Airavata Web UI’s
>>>>>> * Airavata GUI Tools
>>>>>> * Airavata Admin Tools
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am + 0 on this. Not sure if breaking up will reduce clutter and
>>>>> provide better manageability or will overwhelm.
>>>>>> Here are some examples, if it helps:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://github.com/jclouds
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And the master ASF repo which is an umbrella for all apache project
>>>>> mirrors - https://github.com/apache
>>>>>> Suresh
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Jan 21, 2014, at 2:36 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> For now, I want to keep the same structure with one repository.
>>>>> Assuming
>>>>>>> the vote passes, this will be a simple email to Apache INFRA to do
>>>>> the
>>>>>>> conversion. We can bring up reorganization separately.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please let me know if I am missing something, though.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Marlon
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 1/21/14 2:28 PM, Shameera Rathnayaka wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi Marlon,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> do we have any idea about the git repository structure we will
>>>>> use? all
>>>>>>>> Airavata code will go under one git repository or we will have
>>>>> separate
>>>>>>>> repository to airavata client , airvata server and xBaya? (can be
>>>>> fine
>>>>>>>> grain further if needed).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>> Shameera.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Since this will effect everyone, I will start a 72 hour voting
>>>>> period
>>>>>>>>> and discussion thread. Please vote only on the [VOTE] thread so
>>>>> that it
>>>>>>>>> will be easy to count. All opinions are welcome.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Marlon
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 1/16/14 10:51 PM, Amila Jayasekara wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> +1 to move to Git.
>>>>>>>>>> It seems it is easy for people to contribute with GIT. (Specially
>>>>>>>>>> situations like GSOC).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>>>> Thejaka Amila
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Marlon for resurrecting this discussion. Its also timely
>>>>> to the
>>>>>>>>>>> transition before GSOC 14 and as we move towards Airavata 1.0.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> One thing we have noticed is INFRA support for GIT transition
>>>>> has
>>>>>>>>>>> increased over time. Also, the integration with GITHUB, jClouds
>>>>> has
>>>>>>>>> fully
>>>>>>>>>>> exploited this and now there may be other projects also. So all
>>>>> in all
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>>> timing is very good and + 1 to move foreword for Airavata.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Suresh
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 16, 2014, at 2:50 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi all--
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> We have discussed $subject before for other reasons without
>>>>> much action
>>>>>>>>>>>> [0], so I want to bring it up again. Unless the situation has
>>>>> changed
>>>>>>>>>>>> recently, Apache's Jira no longer links SVN commit messages to
>>>>> Jira
>>>>>>>>>>>> tickets. For background on the issues with SVN, see [1].
>>>>> This ticket
>>>>>>>>>>>> is still unresolved.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The general linking of repo commits to Jira tickets through
>>>>> commit
>>>>>>>>>>>> comments [2] is a good and virtuous thing. We have lost this
>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>> Airavata and need to get it back. This requires moving to Git
>>>>> [3] [4].
>>>>>>>>>>>> What other consequences are there for doing this? Let's please
>>>>>>>>>>>> discuss. It will take a bit of time from INFRA to make the
>>>>> conversion,
>>>>>>>>>>>> but this doesn't seem to be awful. We need to preserve
>>>>> history if we
>>>>>>>>> do
>>>>>>>>>>>> this. What else?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks--
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Marlon
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> [0]
>>>>> https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@airavata.apache.org/msg03881.html
>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://ecosystem.atlassian.net/browse/SVN-385
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> [2] http://www.apache.org/dev/svngit2jira.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> [3] https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> [4]
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20INFRA%20AND%20text%20~%20%22git%20svn%22
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Best Regards,
>>>> Shameera Rathnayaka.
>>>>
>>>> email: shameera AT apache.org , shameerainfo AT gmail.com
>>>> Blog : http://shameerarathnayaka.blogspot.com/
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Best Regards,
>> Shameera Rathnayaka.
>>
>> email: shameera AT apache.org , shameerainfo AT gmail.com
>> Blog : http://shameerarathnayaka.blogspot.com/
>>
Re: Commit messages, Jira, and version control
Posted by Amila Jayasekara <th...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 6:44 AM, Shameera Rathnayaka <shameerainfo@gmail.com
> wrote:
> Hi Amila,
>
> see my comment inline,
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Amila Jayasekara <thejaka.amila@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>>
>>> Isn't it good to use separate repository to XBaya? My point is, Then we
>>> can introduce another GUI client( Web base) and deprecate XBaya in future.
>>>
>>
>> I do not think it is good to have XBaya in a separate repo. There are lot
>> of common code which XBaya and other artefacts share.
>>
>
> IMO as a GUI client, Xbaya only depend on Airavata client api? If not
> isn't it better to do this separation? As a result we will end up getting
> rich client API. WDYT?
>
There are common code like utils, configurations that both XBaya and other
artefacts depends on.
Again 2 repos mean more work. 2 build servers, 2 release cycles and more
dependencies. And so far we didnt encounter issues managing Airavata code
using a single repo. Maybe we can consider this when we really face issues
with a single repo.
Thanks
Amila
>
>
>
>> So it is bit tricky how to separate these artefacts into 2 separate
>> repos. Also incase if we find a blocker in common code we anyhow have to
>> release both repositories. So in long term it will be a hassle to maintain
>> 2 repos. Again Airavata is not a huge code base, therefore working with a
>> single repository will be easy IMO.
>>
>
> Yes i agree with you, if the code base it not huge it is always good to
> keep all in one repository. the rational behind above suggestion is ,
> Airavata will have multiple GUI clients( XBaya, Web base GUI , etc ... ) in
> future. IMO server side developer will not works on GUI client code
> frequently. But first of all we need to decouple XBaya from server code.
>
>
>>
>> It is certainly good to think about these now. Thanks for bringing this
>> Shameera.
>>
>
> you are welcome Amila :).
>
> Thanks,
> Shameera.
>
>>
>> Regards
>> Thejaka Amila
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Shameera.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Actually I responded pre-maturely. I am myself not convinced if this
>>>> will help or is needed. Let me withdraw my suggestion and stick to an
>>>> opinion (for now) to have a single unified repo. We may want to once
>>>> revisit the layout as we get close to 1.0.
>>>>
>>>> Suresh
>>>>
>>>> On Jan 21, 2014, at 9:46 PM, Amila Jayasekara <th...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > Hi Suresh,
>>>> >
>>>> > I didnt quite understand what you proposed. Are you proposing to have
>>>> separate repos for "Airavata Services", "Airavata Client SDK’s" etc ... ?
>>>> > If so I am with Danushka.
>>>> >
>>>> > Also Airavata is a fairly manageable code base. So I also dont see an
>>>> advantage having separate repos for each of the sub-components.
>>>> >
>>>> > Thanks
>>>> > Amila
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Danushka Menikkumbura <
>>>> danushka.menikkumbura@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > Suresh,
>>>> >
>>>> > IMO, having independent repositories does not really help unless the
>>>> components are mutually exclusive and we ship them independently.
>>>> >
>>>> > Danushka
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 1:32 AM, Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > In retrospect, it may be better to make this decision now and have
>>>> INFRA create the required repositories at once.
>>>> >
>>>> > I kind of liked what Shameera started, just to rephrase:
>>>> >
>>>> > * Airavata Services
>>>> > * Airavata Client SDK’s
>>>> > * Airavata Web UI’s
>>>> > * Airavata GUI Tools
>>>> > * Airavata Admin Tools
>>>> >
>>>> > I am + 0 on this. Not sure if breaking up will reduce clutter and
>>>> provide better manageability or will overwhelm.
>>>> >
>>>> > Here are some examples, if it helps:
>>>> >
>>>> > https://github.com/jclouds
>>>> >
>>>> > And the master ASF repo which is an umbrella for all apache project
>>>> mirrors - https://github.com/apache
>>>> >
>>>> > Suresh
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > On Jan 21, 2014, at 2:36 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > > For now, I want to keep the same structure with one repository.
>>>> Assuming
>>>> > > the vote passes, this will be a simple email to Apache INFRA to do
>>>> the
>>>> > > conversion. We can bring up reorganization separately.
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Please let me know if I am missing something, though.
>>>> > >
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Marlon
>>>> > >
>>>> > > On 1/21/14 2:28 PM, Shameera Rathnayaka wrote:
>>>> > >> Hi Marlon,
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> do we have any idea about the git repository structure we will
>>>> use? all
>>>> > >> Airavata code will go under one git repository or we will have
>>>> separate
>>>> > >> repository to airavata client , airvata server and xBaya? (can be
>>>> fine
>>>> > >> grain further if needed).
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> Thanks,
>>>> > >> Shameera.
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >>> Since this will effect everyone, I will start a 72 hour voting
>>>> period
>>>> > >>> and discussion thread. Please vote only on the [VOTE] thread so
>>>> that it
>>>> > >>> will be easy to count. All opinions are welcome.
>>>> > >>>
>>>> > >>>
>>>> > >>> Marlon
>>>> > >>>
>>>> > >>> On 1/16/14 10:51 PM, Amila Jayasekara wrote:
>>>> > >>>> +1 to move to Git.
>>>> > >>>> It seems it is easy for people to contribute with GIT. (Specially
>>>> > >>>> situations like GSOC).
>>>> > >>>>
>>>> > >>>> Thanks
>>>> > >>>> Thejaka Amila
>>>> > >>>>
>>>> > >>>>
>>>> > >>>> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > >>>>
>>>> > >>>>> Thanks Marlon for resurrecting this discussion. Its also timely
>>>> to the
>>>> > >>>>> transition before GSOC 14 and as we move towards Airavata 1.0.
>>>> > >>>>>
>>>> > >>>>> One thing we have noticed is INFRA support for GIT transition
>>>> has
>>>> > >>>>> increased over time. Also, the integration with GITHUB, jClouds
>>>> has
>>>> > >>> fully
>>>> > >>>>> exploited this and now there may be other projects also. So all
>>>> in all
>>>> > >>> the
>>>> > >>>>> timing is very good and + 1 to move foreword for Airavata.
>>>> > >>>>>
>>>> > >>>>> Suresh
>>>> > >>>>>
>>>> > >>>>> On Jan 16, 2014, at 2:50 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > >>>>>
>>>> > >>>>>> Hi all--
>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>> > >>>>>> We have discussed $subject before for other reasons without
>>>> much action
>>>> > >>>>>> [0], so I want to bring it up again. Unless the situation has
>>>> changed
>>>> > >>>>>> recently, Apache's Jira no longer links SVN commit messages to
>>>> Jira
>>>> > >>>>>> tickets. For background on the issues with SVN, see [1].
>>>> This ticket
>>>> > >>>>>> is still unresolved.
>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>> > >>>>>> The general linking of repo commits to Jira tickets through
>>>> commit
>>>> > >>>>>> comments [2] is a good and virtuous thing. We have lost this
>>>> in
>>>> > >>>>>> Airavata and need to get it back. This requires moving to Git
>>>> [3] [4].
>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>> > >>>>>> What other consequences are there for doing this? Let's please
>>>> > >>>>>> discuss. It will take a bit of time from INFRA to make the
>>>> conversion,
>>>> > >>>>>> but this doesn't seem to be awful. We need to preserve
>>>> history if we
>>>> > >>> do
>>>> > >>>>>> this. What else?
>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>> > >>>>>> Thanks--
>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>> > >>>>>> Marlon
>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>> > >>>>>> [0]
>>>> https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@airavata.apache.org/msg03881.html
>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>> > >>>>>> [1] https://ecosystem.atlassian.net/browse/SVN-385
>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>> > >>>>>> [2] http://www.apache.org/dev/svngit2jira.html
>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>> > >>>>>> [3] https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>> > >>>>>> [4]
>>>> > >>>>>>
>>>> > >>>
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20INFRA%20AND%20text%20~%20%22git%20svn%22
>>>> > >>>>>
>>>> > >>>
>>>> > >>
>>>> > >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best Regards,
>>> Shameera Rathnayaka.
>>>
>>> email: shameera AT apache.org , shameerainfo AT gmail.com
>>> Blog : http://shameerarathnayaka.blogspot.com/
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Shameera Rathnayaka.
>
> email: shameera AT apache.org , shameerainfo AT gmail.com
> Blog : http://shameerarathnayaka.blogspot.com/
>
Re: Commit messages, Jira, and version control
Posted by Shameera Rathnayaka <sh...@gmail.com>.
Hi Amila,
see my comment inline,
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Amila Jayasekara
<th...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>>
>> Isn't it good to use separate repository to XBaya? My point is, Then we
>> can introduce another GUI client( Web base) and deprecate XBaya in future.
>>
>
> I do not think it is good to have XBaya in a separate repo. There are lot
> of common code which XBaya and other artefacts share.
>
IMO as a GUI client, Xbaya only depend on Airavata client api? If not isn't
it better to do this separation? As a result we will end up getting rich
client API. WDYT?
> So it is bit tricky how to separate these artefacts into 2 separate repos.
> Also incase if we find a blocker in common code we anyhow have to release
> both repositories. So in long term it will be a hassle to maintain 2 repos.
> Again Airavata is not a huge code base, therefore working with a single
> repository will be easy IMO.
>
Yes i agree with you, if the code base it not huge it is always good to
keep all in one repository. the rational behind above suggestion is ,
Airavata will have multiple GUI clients( XBaya, Web base GUI , etc ... ) in
future. IMO server side developer will not works on GUI client code
frequently. But first of all we need to decouple XBaya from server code.
>
> It is certainly good to think about these now. Thanks for bringing this
> Shameera.
>
you are welcome Amila :).
Thanks,
Shameera.
>
> Regards
> Thejaka Amila
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Shameera.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Actually I responded pre-maturely. I am myself not convinced if this
>>> will help or is needed. Let me withdraw my suggestion and stick to an
>>> opinion (for now) to have a single unified repo. We may want to once
>>> revisit the layout as we get close to 1.0.
>>>
>>> Suresh
>>>
>>> On Jan 21, 2014, at 9:46 PM, Amila Jayasekara <th...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Hi Suresh,
>>> >
>>> > I didnt quite understand what you proposed. Are you proposing to have
>>> separate repos for "Airavata Services", "Airavata Client SDK’s" etc ... ?
>>> > If so I am with Danushka.
>>> >
>>> > Also Airavata is a fairly manageable code base. So I also dont see an
>>> advantage having separate repos for each of the sub-components.
>>> >
>>> > Thanks
>>> > Amila
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Danushka Menikkumbura <
>>> danushka.menikkumbura@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > Suresh,
>>> >
>>> > IMO, having independent repositories does not really help unless the
>>> components are mutually exclusive and we ship them independently.
>>> >
>>> > Danushka
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 1:32 AM, Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>> > In retrospect, it may be better to make this decision now and have
>>> INFRA create the required repositories at once.
>>> >
>>> > I kind of liked what Shameera started, just to rephrase:
>>> >
>>> > * Airavata Services
>>> > * Airavata Client SDK’s
>>> > * Airavata Web UI’s
>>> > * Airavata GUI Tools
>>> > * Airavata Admin Tools
>>> >
>>> > I am + 0 on this. Not sure if breaking up will reduce clutter and
>>> provide better manageability or will overwhelm.
>>> >
>>> > Here are some examples, if it helps:
>>> >
>>> > https://github.com/jclouds
>>> >
>>> > And the master ASF repo which is an umbrella for all apache project
>>> mirrors - https://github.com/apache
>>> >
>>> > Suresh
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Jan 21, 2014, at 2:36 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > For now, I want to keep the same structure with one repository.
>>> Assuming
>>> > > the vote passes, this will be a simple email to Apache INFRA to do
>>> the
>>> > > conversion. We can bring up reorganization separately.
>>> > >
>>> > > Please let me know if I am missing something, though.
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > Marlon
>>> > >
>>> > > On 1/21/14 2:28 PM, Shameera Rathnayaka wrote:
>>> > >> Hi Marlon,
>>> > >>
>>> > >> do we have any idea about the git repository structure we will use?
>>> all
>>> > >> Airavata code will go under one git repository or we will have
>>> separate
>>> > >> repository to airavata client , airvata server and xBaya? (can be
>>> fine
>>> > >> grain further if needed).
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Thanks,
>>> > >> Shameera.
>>> > >>
>>> > >>
>>> > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu>
>>> wrote:
>>> > >>
>>> > >>> Since this will effect everyone, I will start a 72 hour voting
>>> period
>>> > >>> and discussion thread. Please vote only on the [VOTE] thread so
>>> that it
>>> > >>> will be easy to count. All opinions are welcome.
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> Marlon
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>> On 1/16/14 10:51 PM, Amila Jayasekara wrote:
>>> > >>>> +1 to move to Git.
>>> > >>>> It seems it is easy for people to contribute with GIT. (Specially
>>> > >>>> situations like GSOC).
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>> Thanks
>>> > >>>> Thejaka Amila
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>> > >>>>
>>> > >>>>> Thanks Marlon for resurrecting this discussion. Its also timely
>>> to the
>>> > >>>>> transition before GSOC 14 and as we move towards Airavata 1.0.
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> One thing we have noticed is INFRA support for GIT transition has
>>> > >>>>> increased over time. Also, the integration with GITHUB, jClouds
>>> has
>>> > >>> fully
>>> > >>>>> exploited this and now there may be other projects also. So all
>>> in all
>>> > >>> the
>>> > >>>>> timing is very good and + 1 to move foreword for Airavata.
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> Suresh
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>> On Jan 16, 2014, at 2:50 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu>
>>> wrote:
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>>>> Hi all--
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>> We have discussed $subject before for other reasons without
>>> much action
>>> > >>>>>> [0], so I want to bring it up again. Unless the situation has
>>> changed
>>> > >>>>>> recently, Apache's Jira no longer links SVN commit messages to
>>> Jira
>>> > >>>>>> tickets. For background on the issues with SVN, see [1]. This
>>> ticket
>>> > >>>>>> is still unresolved.
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>> The general linking of repo commits to Jira tickets through
>>> commit
>>> > >>>>>> comments [2] is a good and virtuous thing. We have lost this in
>>> > >>>>>> Airavata and need to get it back. This requires moving to Git
>>> [3] [4].
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>> What other consequences are there for doing this? Let's please
>>> > >>>>>> discuss. It will take a bit of time from INFRA to make the
>>> conversion,
>>> > >>>>>> but this doesn't seem to be awful. We need to preserve history
>>> if we
>>> > >>> do
>>> > >>>>>> this. What else?
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>> Thanks--
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>> Marlon
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>> [0]
>>> https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@airavata.apache.org/msg03881.html
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>> [1] https://ecosystem.atlassian.net/browse/SVN-385
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>> [2] http://www.apache.org/dev/svngit2jira.html
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>> [3] https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>>>> [4]
>>> > >>>>>>
>>> > >>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20INFRA%20AND%20text%20~%20%22git%20svn%22
>>> > >>>>>
>>> > >>>
>>> > >>
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best Regards,
>> Shameera Rathnayaka.
>>
>> email: shameera AT apache.org , shameerainfo AT gmail.com
>> Blog : http://shameerarathnayaka.blogspot.com/
>>
>
>
--
Best Regards,
Shameera Rathnayaka.
email: shameera AT apache.org , shameerainfo AT gmail.com
Blog : http://shameerarathnayaka.blogspot.com/
Re: Commit messages, Jira, and version control
Posted by Amila Jayasekara <th...@gmail.com>.
Hi Shameera,
Some comments inline.
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 11:53 PM, Shameera Rathnayaka <
shameerainfo@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just needed to take attention for git repository structure before we go
> with same structure that we have with SVN. It is always good to understand
> what are the options we have and what is best suite for Airavata. This is a
> good place to change the structure of project if it is required.
>
You are correct. I agree this is a good time to think about module
structure and a good time to change if we want.
> Therefore I would like to suggest that we need to rethink of our module
> structure, IMO we are too fine grain here. As an example under the rest
> module we have another four sub modules( can't we merge client and mapping
> modules? ) and for thrift we have two top modules can't we go with one?
> Please correct me if i am wrong ?
>
I am not sure about thrift, but I kind of like how we have organized rest
module right now. IMO I dont think it is too fine grained. I think we have
correct modularity. According to my experience so far it is easy for me to
work with the module structure (for REST) we have right now. But others may
have different view points.
>
> Isn't it good to use separate repository to XBaya? My point is, Then we
> can introduce another GUI client( Web base) and deprecate XBaya in future.
>
I do not think it is good to have XBaya in a separate repo. There are lot
of common code which XBaya and other artefacts share. So it is bit tricky
how to separate these artefacts into 2 separate repos. Also incase if we
find a blocker in common code we anyhow have to release both repositories.
So in long term it will be a hassle to maintain 2 repos. Again Airavata is
not a huge code base, therefore working with a single repository will be
easy IMO.
It is certainly good to think about these now. Thanks for bringing this
Shameera.
Regards
Thejaka Amila
>
> Thanks,
> Shameera.
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Actually I responded pre-maturely. I am myself not convinced if this will
>> help or is needed. Let me withdraw my suggestion and stick to an opinion
>> (for now) to have a single unified repo. We may want to once revisit the
>> layout as we get close to 1.0.
>>
>> Suresh
>>
>> On Jan 21, 2014, at 9:46 PM, Amila Jayasekara <th...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Suresh,
>> >
>> > I didnt quite understand what you proposed. Are you proposing to have
>> separate repos for "Airavata Services", "Airavata Client SDK’s" etc ... ?
>> > If so I am with Danushka.
>> >
>> > Also Airavata is a fairly manageable code base. So I also dont see an
>> advantage having separate repos for each of the sub-components.
>> >
>> > Thanks
>> > Amila
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Danushka Menikkumbura <
>> danushka.menikkumbura@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Suresh,
>> >
>> > IMO, having independent repositories does not really help unless the
>> components are mutually exclusive and we ship them independently.
>> >
>> > Danushka
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 1:32 AM, Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> > In retrospect, it may be better to make this decision now and have
>> INFRA create the required repositories at once.
>> >
>> > I kind of liked what Shameera started, just to rephrase:
>> >
>> > * Airavata Services
>> > * Airavata Client SDK’s
>> > * Airavata Web UI’s
>> > * Airavata GUI Tools
>> > * Airavata Admin Tools
>> >
>> > I am + 0 on this. Not sure if breaking up will reduce clutter and
>> provide better manageability or will overwhelm.
>> >
>> > Here are some examples, if it helps:
>> >
>> > https://github.com/jclouds
>> >
>> > And the master ASF repo which is an umbrella for all apache project
>> mirrors - https://github.com/apache
>> >
>> > Suresh
>> >
>> >
>> > On Jan 21, 2014, at 2:36 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu> wrote:
>> >
>> > > For now, I want to keep the same structure with one repository.
>> Assuming
>> > > the vote passes, this will be a simple email to Apache INFRA to do the
>> > > conversion. We can bring up reorganization separately.
>> > >
>> > > Please let me know if I am missing something, though.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Marlon
>> > >
>> > > On 1/21/14 2:28 PM, Shameera Rathnayaka wrote:
>> > >> Hi Marlon,
>> > >>
>> > >> do we have any idea about the git repository structure we will use?
>> all
>> > >> Airavata code will go under one git repository or we will have
>> separate
>> > >> repository to airavata client , airvata server and xBaya? (can be
>> fine
>> > >> grain further if needed).
>> > >>
>> > >> Thanks,
>> > >> Shameera.
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu>
>> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >>> Since this will effect everyone, I will start a 72 hour voting
>> period
>> > >>> and discussion thread. Please vote only on the [VOTE] thread so
>> that it
>> > >>> will be easy to count. All opinions are welcome.
>> > >>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Marlon
>> > >>>
>> > >>> On 1/16/14 10:51 PM, Amila Jayasekara wrote:
>> > >>>> +1 to move to Git.
>> > >>>> It seems it is easy for people to contribute with GIT. (Specially
>> > >>>> situations like GSOC).
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> Thanks
>> > >>>> Thejaka Amila
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>>> Thanks Marlon for resurrecting this discussion. Its also timely
>> to the
>> > >>>>> transition before GSOC 14 and as we move towards Airavata 1.0.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> One thing we have noticed is INFRA support for GIT transition has
>> > >>>>> increased over time. Also, the integration with GITHUB, jClouds
>> has
>> > >>> fully
>> > >>>>> exploited this and now there may be other projects also. So all
>> in all
>> > >>> the
>> > >>>>> timing is very good and + 1 to move foreword for Airavata.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> Suresh
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> On Jan 16, 2014, at 2:50 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu>
>> wrote:
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>>> Hi all--
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> We have discussed $subject before for other reasons without much
>> action
>> > >>>>>> [0], so I want to bring it up again. Unless the situation has
>> changed
>> > >>>>>> recently, Apache's Jira no longer links SVN commit messages to
>> Jira
>> > >>>>>> tickets. For background on the issues with SVN, see [1]. This
>> ticket
>> > >>>>>> is still unresolved.
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> The general linking of repo commits to Jira tickets through
>> commit
>> > >>>>>> comments [2] is a good and virtuous thing. We have lost this in
>> > >>>>>> Airavata and need to get it back. This requires moving to Git
>> [3] [4].
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> What other consequences are there for doing this? Let's please
>> > >>>>>> discuss. It will take a bit of time from INFRA to make the
>> conversion,
>> > >>>>>> but this doesn't seem to be awful. We need to preserve history
>> if we
>> > >>> do
>> > >>>>>> this. What else?
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> Thanks--
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> Marlon
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> [0]
>> https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@airavata.apache.org/msg03881.html
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> [1] https://ecosystem.atlassian.net/browse/SVN-385
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> [2] http://www.apache.org/dev/svngit2jira.html
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> [3] https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>>>> [4]
>> > >>>>>>
>> > >>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20INFRA%20AND%20text%20~%20%22git%20svn%22
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>
>> > >>
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Shameera Rathnayaka.
>
> email: shameera AT apache.org , shameerainfo AT gmail.com
> Blog : http://shameerarathnayaka.blogspot.com/
>
Re: Commit messages, Jira, and version control
Posted by Shameera Rathnayaka <sh...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
I just needed to take attention for git repository structure before we go
with same structure that we have with SVN. It is always good to understand
what are the options we have and what is best suite for Airavata. This is a
good place to change the structure of project if it is required. Therefore
I would like to suggest that we need to rethink of our module structure,
IMO we are too fine grain here. As an example under the rest module we have
another four sub modules( can't we merge client and mapping modules? ) and
for thrift we have two top modules can't we go with one? Please correct
me if i am wrong ?
Isn't it good to use separate repository to XBaya? My point is, Then we can
introduce another GUI client( Web base) and deprecate XBaya in future.
Thanks,
Shameera.
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org> wrote:
> Actually I responded pre-maturely. I am myself not convinced if this will
> help or is needed. Let me withdraw my suggestion and stick to an opinion
> (for now) to have a single unified repo. We may want to once revisit the
> layout as we get close to 1.0.
>
> Suresh
>
> On Jan 21, 2014, at 9:46 PM, Amila Jayasekara <th...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Suresh,
> >
> > I didnt quite understand what you proposed. Are you proposing to have
> separate repos for "Airavata Services", "Airavata Client SDK’s" etc ... ?
> > If so I am with Danushka.
> >
> > Also Airavata is a fairly manageable code base. So I also dont see an
> advantage having separate repos for each of the sub-components.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Amila
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Danushka Menikkumbura <
> danushka.menikkumbura@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Suresh,
> >
> > IMO, having independent repositories does not really help unless the
> components are mutually exclusive and we ship them independently.
> >
> > Danushka
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 1:32 AM, Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org> wrote:
> > In retrospect, it may be better to make this decision now and have INFRA
> create the required repositories at once.
> >
> > I kind of liked what Shameera started, just to rephrase:
> >
> > * Airavata Services
> > * Airavata Client SDK’s
> > * Airavata Web UI’s
> > * Airavata GUI Tools
> > * Airavata Admin Tools
> >
> > I am + 0 on this. Not sure if breaking up will reduce clutter and
> provide better manageability or will overwhelm.
> >
> > Here are some examples, if it helps:
> >
> > https://github.com/jclouds
> >
> > And the master ASF repo which is an umbrella for all apache project
> mirrors - https://github.com/apache
> >
> > Suresh
> >
> >
> > On Jan 21, 2014, at 2:36 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu> wrote:
> >
> > > For now, I want to keep the same structure with one repository.
> Assuming
> > > the vote passes, this will be a simple email to Apache INFRA to do the
> > > conversion. We can bring up reorganization separately.
> > >
> > > Please let me know if I am missing something, though.
> > >
> > >
> > > Marlon
> > >
> > > On 1/21/14 2:28 PM, Shameera Rathnayaka wrote:
> > >> Hi Marlon,
> > >>
> > >> do we have any idea about the git repository structure we will use?
> all
> > >> Airavata code will go under one git repository or we will have
> separate
> > >> repository to airavata client , airvata server and xBaya? (can be fine
> > >> grain further if needed).
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >> Shameera.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Since this will effect everyone, I will start a 72 hour voting period
> > >>> and discussion thread. Please vote only on the [VOTE] thread so
> that it
> > >>> will be easy to count. All opinions are welcome.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Marlon
> > >>>
> > >>> On 1/16/14 10:51 PM, Amila Jayasekara wrote:
> > >>>> +1 to move to Git.
> > >>>> It seems it is easy for people to contribute with GIT. (Specially
> > >>>> situations like GSOC).
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Thanks
> > >>>> Thejaka Amila
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>> Thanks Marlon for resurrecting this discussion. Its also timely to
> the
> > >>>>> transition before GSOC 14 and as we move towards Airavata 1.0.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> One thing we have noticed is INFRA support for GIT transition has
> > >>>>> increased over time. Also, the integration with GITHUB, jClouds has
> > >>> fully
> > >>>>> exploited this and now there may be other projects also. So all in
> all
> > >>> the
> > >>>>> timing is very good and + 1 to move foreword for Airavata.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Suresh
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Jan 16, 2014, at 2:50 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu>
> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>> Hi all--
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> We have discussed $subject before for other reasons without much
> action
> > >>>>>> [0], so I want to bring it up again. Unless the situation has
> changed
> > >>>>>> recently, Apache's Jira no longer links SVN commit messages to
> Jira
> > >>>>>> tickets. For background on the issues with SVN, see [1]. This
> ticket
> > >>>>>> is still unresolved.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> The general linking of repo commits to Jira tickets through commit
> > >>>>>> comments [2] is a good and virtuous thing. We have lost this in
> > >>>>>> Airavata and need to get it back. This requires moving to Git
> [3] [4].
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> What other consequences are there for doing this? Let's please
> > >>>>>> discuss. It will take a bit of time from INFRA to make the
> conversion,
> > >>>>>> but this doesn't seem to be awful. We need to preserve history
> if we
> > >>> do
> > >>>>>> this. What else?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Thanks--
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Marlon
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> [0]
> https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@airavata.apache.org/msg03881.html
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> [1] https://ecosystem.atlassian.net/browse/SVN-385
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> [2] http://www.apache.org/dev/svngit2jira.html
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> [3] https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> [4]
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20INFRA%20AND%20text%20~%20%22git%20svn%22
> > >>>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
--
Best Regards,
Shameera Rathnayaka.
email: shameera AT apache.org , shameerainfo AT gmail.com
Blog : http://shameerarathnayaka.blogspot.com/
Re: Commit messages, Jira, and version control
Posted by Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org>.
Actually I responded pre-maturely. I am myself not convinced if this will help or is needed. Let me withdraw my suggestion and stick to an opinion (for now) to have a single unified repo. We may want to once revisit the layout as we get close to 1.0.
Suresh
On Jan 21, 2014, at 9:46 PM, Amila Jayasekara <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Suresh,
>
> I didnt quite understand what you proposed. Are you proposing to have separate repos for "Airavata Services", "Airavata Client SDK’s" etc ... ?
> If so I am with Danushka.
>
> Also Airavata is a fairly manageable code base. So I also dont see an advantage having separate repos for each of the sub-components.
>
> Thanks
> Amila
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Danushka Menikkumbura <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Suresh,
>
> IMO, having independent repositories does not really help unless the components are mutually exclusive and we ship them independently.
>
> Danushka
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 1:32 AM, Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org> wrote:
> In retrospect, it may be better to make this decision now and have INFRA create the required repositories at once.
>
> I kind of liked what Shameera started, just to rephrase:
>
> * Airavata Services
> * Airavata Client SDK’s
> * Airavata Web UI’s
> * Airavata GUI Tools
> * Airavata Admin Tools
>
> I am + 0 on this. Not sure if breaking up will reduce clutter and provide better manageability or will overwhelm.
>
> Here are some examples, if it helps:
>
> https://github.com/jclouds
>
> And the master ASF repo which is an umbrella for all apache project mirrors - https://github.com/apache
>
> Suresh
>
>
> On Jan 21, 2014, at 2:36 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu> wrote:
>
> > For now, I want to keep the same structure with one repository. Assuming
> > the vote passes, this will be a simple email to Apache INFRA to do the
> > conversion. We can bring up reorganization separately.
> >
> > Please let me know if I am missing something, though.
> >
> >
> > Marlon
> >
> > On 1/21/14 2:28 PM, Shameera Rathnayaka wrote:
> >> Hi Marlon,
> >>
> >> do we have any idea about the git repository structure we will use? all
> >> Airavata code will go under one git repository or we will have separate
> >> repository to airavata client , airvata server and xBaya? (can be fine
> >> grain further if needed).
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Shameera.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Since this will effect everyone, I will start a 72 hour voting period
> >>> and discussion thread. Please vote only on the [VOTE] thread so that it
> >>> will be easy to count. All opinions are welcome.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Marlon
> >>>
> >>> On 1/16/14 10:51 PM, Amila Jayasekara wrote:
> >>>> +1 to move to Git.
> >>>> It seems it is easy for people to contribute with GIT. (Specially
> >>>> situations like GSOC).
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks
> >>>> Thejaka Amila
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Thanks Marlon for resurrecting this discussion. Its also timely to the
> >>>>> transition before GSOC 14 and as we move towards Airavata 1.0.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> One thing we have noticed is INFRA support for GIT transition has
> >>>>> increased over time. Also, the integration with GITHUB, jClouds has
> >>> fully
> >>>>> exploited this and now there may be other projects also. So all in all
> >>> the
> >>>>> timing is very good and + 1 to move foreword for Airavata.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Suresh
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Jan 16, 2014, at 2:50 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi all--
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> We have discussed $subject before for other reasons without much action
> >>>>>> [0], so I want to bring it up again. Unless the situation has changed
> >>>>>> recently, Apache's Jira no longer links SVN commit messages to Jira
> >>>>>> tickets. For background on the issues with SVN, see [1]. This ticket
> >>>>>> is still unresolved.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The general linking of repo commits to Jira tickets through commit
> >>>>>> comments [2] is a good and virtuous thing. We have lost this in
> >>>>>> Airavata and need to get it back. This requires moving to Git [3] [4].
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> What other consequences are there for doing this? Let's please
> >>>>>> discuss. It will take a bit of time from INFRA to make the conversion,
> >>>>>> but this doesn't seem to be awful. We need to preserve history if we
> >>> do
> >>>>>> this. What else?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks--
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Marlon
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [0] https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@airavata.apache.org/msg03881.html
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [1] https://ecosystem.atlassian.net/browse/SVN-385
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [2] http://www.apache.org/dev/svngit2jira.html
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [3] https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [4]
> >>>>>>
> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20INFRA%20AND%20text%20~%20%22git%20svn%22
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
>
>
Re: Commit messages, Jira, and version control
Posted by Amila Jayasekara <th...@gmail.com>.
Hi Suresh,
I didnt quite understand what you proposed. Are you proposing to have
separate repos for "Airavata Services", "Airavata Client SDK’s" etc ... ?
If so I am with Danushka.
Also Airavata is a fairly manageable code base. So I also dont see an
advantage having separate repos for each of the sub-components.
Thanks
Amila
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Danushka Menikkumbura <
danushka.menikkumbura@gmail.com> wrote:
> Suresh,
>
> IMO, having independent repositories does not really help unless the
> components are mutually exclusive and we ship them independently.
>
> Danushka
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 1:32 AM, Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> In retrospect, it may be better to make this decision now and have INFRA
>> create the required repositories at once.
>>
>> I kind of liked what Shameera started, just to rephrase:
>>
>> * Airavata Services
>> * Airavata Client SDK’s
>> * Airavata Web UI’s
>> * Airavata GUI Tools
>> * Airavata Admin Tools
>>
>> I am + 0 on this. Not sure if breaking up will reduce clutter and provide
>> better manageability or will overwhelm.
>>
>> Here are some examples, if it helps:
>>
>> https://github.com/jclouds
>>
>> And the master ASF repo which is an umbrella for all apache project
>> mirrors - https://github.com/apache
>>
>> Suresh
>>
>>
>> On Jan 21, 2014, at 2:36 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu> wrote:
>>
>> > For now, I want to keep the same structure with one repository. Assuming
>> > the vote passes, this will be a simple email to Apache INFRA to do the
>> > conversion. We can bring up reorganization separately.
>> >
>> > Please let me know if I am missing something, though.
>> >
>> >
>> > Marlon
>> >
>> > On 1/21/14 2:28 PM, Shameera Rathnayaka wrote:
>> >> Hi Marlon,
>> >>
>> >> do we have any idea about the git repository structure we will use? all
>> >> Airavata code will go under one git repository or we will have separate
>> >> repository to airavata client , airvata server and xBaya? (can be fine
>> >> grain further if needed).
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Shameera.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Since this will effect everyone, I will start a 72 hour voting period
>> >>> and discussion thread. Please vote only on the [VOTE] thread so that
>> it
>> >>> will be easy to count. All opinions are welcome.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Marlon
>> >>>
>> >>> On 1/16/14 10:51 PM, Amila Jayasekara wrote:
>> >>>> +1 to move to Git.
>> >>>> It seems it is easy for people to contribute with GIT. (Specially
>> >>>> situations like GSOC).
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Thanks
>> >>>> Thejaka Amila
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> Thanks Marlon for resurrecting this discussion. Its also timely to
>> the
>> >>>>> transition before GSOC 14 and as we move towards Airavata 1.0.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> One thing we have noticed is INFRA support for GIT transition has
>> >>>>> increased over time. Also, the integration with GITHUB, jClouds has
>> >>> fully
>> >>>>> exploited this and now there may be other projects also. So all in
>> all
>> >>> the
>> >>>>> timing is very good and + 1 to move foreword for Airavata.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Suresh
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Jan 16, 2014, at 2:50 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> Hi all--
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> We have discussed $subject before for other reasons without much
>> action
>> >>>>>> [0], so I want to bring it up again. Unless the situation has
>> changed
>> >>>>>> recently, Apache's Jira no longer links SVN commit messages to Jira
>> >>>>>> tickets. For background on the issues with SVN, see [1]. This
>> ticket
>> >>>>>> is still unresolved.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> The general linking of repo commits to Jira tickets through commit
>> >>>>>> comments [2] is a good and virtuous thing. We have lost this in
>> >>>>>> Airavata and need to get it back. This requires moving to Git [3]
>> [4].
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> What other consequences are there for doing this? Let's please
>> >>>>>> discuss. It will take a bit of time from INFRA to make the
>> conversion,
>> >>>>>> but this doesn't seem to be awful. We need to preserve history if
>> we
>> >>> do
>> >>>>>> this. What else?
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Thanks--
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Marlon
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> [0]
>> https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@airavata.apache.org/msg03881.html
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> [1] https://ecosystem.atlassian.net/browse/SVN-385
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> [2] http://www.apache.org/dev/svngit2jira.html
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> [3] https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> [4]
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20INFRA%20AND%20text%20~%20%22git%20svn%22
>> >>>>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>
Re: Commit messages, Jira, and version control
Posted by Danushka Menikkumbura <da...@gmail.com>.
Suresh,
IMO, having independent repositories does not really help unless the
components are mutually exclusive and we ship them independently.
Danushka
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 1:32 AM, Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org> wrote:
> In retrospect, it may be better to make this decision now and have INFRA
> create the required repositories at once.
>
> I kind of liked what Shameera started, just to rephrase:
>
> * Airavata Services
> * Airavata Client SDK’s
> * Airavata Web UI’s
> * Airavata GUI Tools
> * Airavata Admin Tools
>
> I am + 0 on this. Not sure if breaking up will reduce clutter and provide
> better manageability or will overwhelm.
>
> Here are some examples, if it helps:
>
> https://github.com/jclouds
>
> And the master ASF repo which is an umbrella for all apache project
> mirrors - https://github.com/apache
>
> Suresh
>
>
> On Jan 21, 2014, at 2:36 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu> wrote:
>
> > For now, I want to keep the same structure with one repository. Assuming
> > the vote passes, this will be a simple email to Apache INFRA to do the
> > conversion. We can bring up reorganization separately.
> >
> > Please let me know if I am missing something, though.
> >
> >
> > Marlon
> >
> > On 1/21/14 2:28 PM, Shameera Rathnayaka wrote:
> >> Hi Marlon,
> >>
> >> do we have any idea about the git repository structure we will use? all
> >> Airavata code will go under one git repository or we will have separate
> >> repository to airavata client , airvata server and xBaya? (can be fine
> >> grain further if needed).
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Shameera.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Since this will effect everyone, I will start a 72 hour voting period
> >>> and discussion thread. Please vote only on the [VOTE] thread so that
> it
> >>> will be easy to count. All opinions are welcome.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Marlon
> >>>
> >>> On 1/16/14 10:51 PM, Amila Jayasekara wrote:
> >>>> +1 to move to Git.
> >>>> It seems it is easy for people to contribute with GIT. (Specially
> >>>> situations like GSOC).
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks
> >>>> Thejaka Amila
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Thanks Marlon for resurrecting this discussion. Its also timely to
> the
> >>>>> transition before GSOC 14 and as we move towards Airavata 1.0.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> One thing we have noticed is INFRA support for GIT transition has
> >>>>> increased over time. Also, the integration with GITHUB, jClouds has
> >>> fully
> >>>>> exploited this and now there may be other projects also. So all in
> all
> >>> the
> >>>>> timing is very good and + 1 to move foreword for Airavata.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Suresh
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Jan 16, 2014, at 2:50 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi all--
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> We have discussed $subject before for other reasons without much
> action
> >>>>>> [0], so I want to bring it up again. Unless the situation has
> changed
> >>>>>> recently, Apache's Jira no longer links SVN commit messages to Jira
> >>>>>> tickets. For background on the issues with SVN, see [1]. This
> ticket
> >>>>>> is still unresolved.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The general linking of repo commits to Jira tickets through commit
> >>>>>> comments [2] is a good and virtuous thing. We have lost this in
> >>>>>> Airavata and need to get it back. This requires moving to Git [3]
> [4].
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> What other consequences are there for doing this? Let's please
> >>>>>> discuss. It will take a bit of time from INFRA to make the
> conversion,
> >>>>>> but this doesn't seem to be awful. We need to preserve history if
> we
> >>> do
> >>>>>> this. What else?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks--
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Marlon
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [0]
> https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@airavata.apache.org/msg03881.html
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [1] https://ecosystem.atlassian.net/browse/SVN-385
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [2] http://www.apache.org/dev/svngit2jira.html
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [3] https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [4]
> >>>>>>
> >>>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20INFRA%20AND%20text%20~%20%22git%20svn%22
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
>
Re: Commit messages, Jira, and version control
Posted by Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org>.
In retrospect, it may be better to make this decision now and have INFRA create the required repositories at once.
I kind of liked what Shameera started, just to rephrase:
* Airavata Services
* Airavata Client SDK’s
* Airavata Web UI’s
* Airavata GUI Tools
* Airavata Admin Tools
I am + 0 on this. Not sure if breaking up will reduce clutter and provide better manageability or will overwhelm.
Here are some examples, if it helps:
https://github.com/jclouds
And the master ASF repo which is an umbrella for all apache project mirrors - https://github.com/apache
Suresh
On Jan 21, 2014, at 2:36 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu> wrote:
> For now, I want to keep the same structure with one repository. Assuming
> the vote passes, this will be a simple email to Apache INFRA to do the
> conversion. We can bring up reorganization separately.
>
> Please let me know if I am missing something, though.
>
>
> Marlon
>
> On 1/21/14 2:28 PM, Shameera Rathnayaka wrote:
>> Hi Marlon,
>>
>> do we have any idea about the git repository structure we will use? all
>> Airavata code will go under one git repository or we will have separate
>> repository to airavata client , airvata server and xBaya? (can be fine
>> grain further if needed).
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Shameera.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> Since this will effect everyone, I will start a 72 hour voting period
>>> and discussion thread. Please vote only on the [VOTE] thread so that it
>>> will be easy to count. All opinions are welcome.
>>>
>>>
>>> Marlon
>>>
>>> On 1/16/14 10:51 PM, Amila Jayasekara wrote:
>>>> +1 to move to Git.
>>>> It seems it is easy for people to contribute with GIT. (Specially
>>>> situations like GSOC).
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Thejaka Amila
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks Marlon for resurrecting this discussion. Its also timely to the
>>>>> transition before GSOC 14 and as we move towards Airavata 1.0.
>>>>>
>>>>> One thing we have noticed is INFRA support for GIT transition has
>>>>> increased over time. Also, the integration with GITHUB, jClouds has
>>> fully
>>>>> exploited this and now there may be other projects also. So all in all
>>> the
>>>>> timing is very good and + 1 to move foreword for Airavata.
>>>>>
>>>>> Suresh
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jan 16, 2014, at 2:50 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi all--
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We have discussed $subject before for other reasons without much action
>>>>>> [0], so I want to bring it up again. Unless the situation has changed
>>>>>> recently, Apache's Jira no longer links SVN commit messages to Jira
>>>>>> tickets. For background on the issues with SVN, see [1]. This ticket
>>>>>> is still unresolved.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The general linking of repo commits to Jira tickets through commit
>>>>>> comments [2] is a good and virtuous thing. We have lost this in
>>>>>> Airavata and need to get it back. This requires moving to Git [3] [4].
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What other consequences are there for doing this? Let's please
>>>>>> discuss. It will take a bit of time from INFRA to make the conversion,
>>>>>> but this doesn't seem to be awful. We need to preserve history if we
>>> do
>>>>>> this. What else?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks--
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Marlon
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [0] https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@airavata.apache.org/msg03881.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1] https://ecosystem.atlassian.net/browse/SVN-385
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [2] http://www.apache.org/dev/svngit2jira.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [3] https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [4]
>>>>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20INFRA%20AND%20text%20~%20%22git%20svn%22
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: Commit messages, Jira, and version control
Posted by Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu>.
For now, I want to keep the same structure with one repository. Assuming
the vote passes, this will be a simple email to Apache INFRA to do the
conversion. We can bring up reorganization separately.
Please let me know if I am missing something, though.
Marlon
On 1/21/14 2:28 PM, Shameera Rathnayaka wrote:
> Hi Marlon,
>
> do we have any idea about the git repository structure we will use? all
> Airavata code will go under one git repository or we will have separate
> repository to airavata client , airvata server and xBaya? (can be fine
> grain further if needed).
>
> Thanks,
> Shameera.
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu> wrote:
>
>> Since this will effect everyone, I will start a 72 hour voting period
>> and discussion thread. Please vote only on the [VOTE] thread so that it
>> will be easy to count. All opinions are welcome.
>>
>>
>> Marlon
>>
>> On 1/16/14 10:51 PM, Amila Jayasekara wrote:
>>> +1 to move to Git.
>>> It seems it is easy for people to contribute with GIT. (Specially
>>> situations like GSOC).
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Thejaka Amila
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thanks Marlon for resurrecting this discussion. Its also timely to the
>>>> transition before GSOC 14 and as we move towards Airavata 1.0.
>>>>
>>>> One thing we have noticed is INFRA support for GIT transition has
>>>> increased over time. Also, the integration with GITHUB, jClouds has
>> fully
>>>> exploited this and now there may be other projects also. So all in all
>> the
>>>> timing is very good and + 1 to move foreword for Airavata.
>>>>
>>>> Suresh
>>>>
>>>> On Jan 16, 2014, at 2:50 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi all--
>>>>>
>>>>> We have discussed $subject before for other reasons without much action
>>>>> [0], so I want to bring it up again. Unless the situation has changed
>>>>> recently, Apache's Jira no longer links SVN commit messages to Jira
>>>>> tickets. For background on the issues with SVN, see [1]. This ticket
>>>>> is still unresolved.
>>>>>
>>>>> The general linking of repo commits to Jira tickets through commit
>>>>> comments [2] is a good and virtuous thing. We have lost this in
>>>>> Airavata and need to get it back. This requires moving to Git [3] [4].
>>>>>
>>>>> What other consequences are there for doing this? Let's please
>>>>> discuss. It will take a bit of time from INFRA to make the conversion,
>>>>> but this doesn't seem to be awful. We need to preserve history if we
>> do
>>>>> this. What else?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks--
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Marlon
>>>>>
>>>>> [0] https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@airavata.apache.org/msg03881.html
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] https://ecosystem.atlassian.net/browse/SVN-385
>>>>>
>>>>> [2] http://www.apache.org/dev/svngit2jira.html
>>>>>
>>>>> [3] https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
>>>>>
>>>>> [4]
>>>>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20INFRA%20AND%20text%20~%20%22git%20svn%22
>>>>
>>
>
Re: Commit messages, Jira, and version control
Posted by Shameera Rathnayaka <sh...@gmail.com>.
Hi Marlon,
do we have any idea about the git repository structure we will use? all
Airavata code will go under one git repository or we will have separate
repository to airavata client , airvata server and xBaya? (can be fine
grain further if needed).
Thanks,
Shameera.
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu> wrote:
> Since this will effect everyone, I will start a 72 hour voting period
> and discussion thread. Please vote only on the [VOTE] thread so that it
> will be easy to count. All opinions are welcome.
>
>
> Marlon
>
> On 1/16/14 10:51 PM, Amila Jayasekara wrote:
> > +1 to move to Git.
> > It seems it is easy for people to contribute with GIT. (Specially
> > situations like GSOC).
> >
> > Thanks
> > Thejaka Amila
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Thanks Marlon for resurrecting this discussion. Its also timely to the
> >> transition before GSOC 14 and as we move towards Airavata 1.0.
> >>
> >> One thing we have noticed is INFRA support for GIT transition has
> >> increased over time. Also, the integration with GITHUB, jClouds has
> fully
> >> exploited this and now there may be other projects also. So all in all
> the
> >> timing is very good and + 1 to move foreword for Airavata.
> >>
> >> Suresh
> >>
> >> On Jan 16, 2014, at 2:50 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi all--
> >>>
> >>> We have discussed $subject before for other reasons without much action
> >>> [0], so I want to bring it up again. Unless the situation has changed
> >>> recently, Apache's Jira no longer links SVN commit messages to Jira
> >>> tickets. For background on the issues with SVN, see [1]. This ticket
> >>> is still unresolved.
> >>>
> >>> The general linking of repo commits to Jira tickets through commit
> >>> comments [2] is a good and virtuous thing. We have lost this in
> >>> Airavata and need to get it back. This requires moving to Git [3] [4].
> >>>
> >>> What other consequences are there for doing this? Let's please
> >>> discuss. It will take a bit of time from INFRA to make the conversion,
> >>> but this doesn't seem to be awful. We need to preserve history if we
> do
> >>> this. What else?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Thanks--
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Marlon
> >>>
> >>> [0] https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@airavata.apache.org/msg03881.html
> >>>
> >>> [1] https://ecosystem.atlassian.net/browse/SVN-385
> >>>
> >>> [2] http://www.apache.org/dev/svngit2jira.html
> >>>
> >>> [3] https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
> >>>
> >>> [4]
> >>>
> >>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20INFRA%20AND%20text%20~%20%22git%20svn%22
> >>
> >>
>
>
--
Best Regards,
Shameera Rathnayaka.
email: shameera AT apache.org , shameerainfo AT gmail.com
Blog : http://shameerarathnayaka.blogspot.com/
Re: Commit messages, Jira, and version control
Posted by Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu>.
Since this will effect everyone, I will start a 72 hour voting period
and discussion thread. Please vote only on the [VOTE] thread so that it
will be easy to count. All opinions are welcome.
Marlon
On 1/16/14 10:51 PM, Amila Jayasekara wrote:
> +1 to move to Git.
> It seems it is easy for people to contribute with GIT. (Specially
> situations like GSOC).
>
> Thanks
> Thejaka Amila
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Marlon for resurrecting this discussion. Its also timely to the
>> transition before GSOC 14 and as we move towards Airavata 1.0.
>>
>> One thing we have noticed is INFRA support for GIT transition has
>> increased over time. Also, the integration with GITHUB, jClouds has fully
>> exploited this and now there may be other projects also. So all in all the
>> timing is very good and + 1 to move foreword for Airavata.
>>
>> Suresh
>>
>> On Jan 16, 2014, at 2:50 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all--
>>>
>>> We have discussed $subject before for other reasons without much action
>>> [0], so I want to bring it up again. Unless the situation has changed
>>> recently, Apache's Jira no longer links SVN commit messages to Jira
>>> tickets. For background on the issues with SVN, see [1]. This ticket
>>> is still unresolved.
>>>
>>> The general linking of repo commits to Jira tickets through commit
>>> comments [2] is a good and virtuous thing. We have lost this in
>>> Airavata and need to get it back. This requires moving to Git [3] [4].
>>>
>>> What other consequences are there for doing this? Let's please
>>> discuss. It will take a bit of time from INFRA to make the conversion,
>>> but this doesn't seem to be awful. We need to preserve history if we do
>>> this. What else?
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks--
>>>
>>>
>>> Marlon
>>>
>>> [0] https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@airavata.apache.org/msg03881.html
>>>
>>> [1] https://ecosystem.atlassian.net/browse/SVN-385
>>>
>>> [2] http://www.apache.org/dev/svngit2jira.html
>>>
>>> [3] https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
>>>
>>> [4]
>>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20INFRA%20AND%20text%20~%20%22git%20svn%22
>>
>>
Re: Commit messages, Jira, and version control
Posted by Amila Jayasekara <th...@gmail.com>.
+1 to move to Git.
It seems it is easy for people to contribute with GIT. (Specially
situations like GSOC).
Thanks
Thejaka Amila
On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org> wrote:
> Thanks Marlon for resurrecting this discussion. Its also timely to the
> transition before GSOC 14 and as we move towards Airavata 1.0.
>
> One thing we have noticed is INFRA support for GIT transition has
> increased over time. Also, the integration with GITHUB, jClouds has fully
> exploited this and now there may be other projects also. So all in all the
> timing is very good and + 1 to move foreword for Airavata.
>
> Suresh
>
> On Jan 16, 2014, at 2:50 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu> wrote:
>
> > Hi all--
> >
> > We have discussed $subject before for other reasons without much action
> > [0], so I want to bring it up again. Unless the situation has changed
> > recently, Apache's Jira no longer links SVN commit messages to Jira
> > tickets. For background on the issues with SVN, see [1]. This ticket
> > is still unresolved.
> >
> > The general linking of repo commits to Jira tickets through commit
> > comments [2] is a good and virtuous thing. We have lost this in
> > Airavata and need to get it back. This requires moving to Git [3] [4].
> >
> > What other consequences are there for doing this? Let's please
> > discuss. It will take a bit of time from INFRA to make the conversion,
> > but this doesn't seem to be awful. We need to preserve history if we do
> > this. What else?
> >
> >
> > Thanks--
> >
> >
> > Marlon
> >
> > [0] https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@airavata.apache.org/msg03881.html
> >
> > [1] https://ecosystem.atlassian.net/browse/SVN-385
> >
> > [2] http://www.apache.org/dev/svngit2jira.html
> >
> > [3] https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
> >
> > [4]
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20INFRA%20AND%20text%20~%20%22git%20svn%22
>
>
Re: Commit messages, Jira, and version control
Posted by Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org>.
Thanks Marlon for resurrecting this discussion. Its also timely to the transition before GSOC 14 and as we move towards Airavata 1.0.
One thing we have noticed is INFRA support for GIT transition has increased over time. Also, the integration with GITHUB, jClouds has fully exploited this and now there may be other projects also. So all in all the timing is very good and + 1 to move foreword for Airavata.
Suresh
On Jan 16, 2014, at 2:50 PM, Marlon Pierce <ma...@iu.edu> wrote:
> Hi all--
>
> We have discussed $subject before for other reasons without much action
> [0], so I want to bring it up again. Unless the situation has changed
> recently, Apache's Jira no longer links SVN commit messages to Jira
> tickets. For background on the issues with SVN, see [1]. This ticket
> is still unresolved.
>
> The general linking of repo commits to Jira tickets through commit
> comments [2] is a good and virtuous thing. We have lost this in
> Airavata and need to get it back. This requires moving to Git [3] [4].
>
> What other consequences are there for doing this? Let's please
> discuss. It will take a bit of time from INFRA to make the conversion,
> but this doesn't seem to be awful. We need to preserve history if we do
> this. What else?
>
>
> Thanks--
>
>
> Marlon
>
> [0] https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@airavata.apache.org/msg03881.html
>
> [1] https://ecosystem.atlassian.net/browse/SVN-385
>
> [2] http://www.apache.org/dev/svngit2jira.html
>
> [3] https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
>
> [4]
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20INFRA%20AND%20text%20~%20%22git%20svn%22