You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@wicket.apache.org by Jeremy Thomerson <je...@wickettraining.com> on 2011/12/21 05:04:34 UTC
Wicket source code moved to Git
Our SVN repository is now set read-only. For information about getting
started with Git @ ASF, see [1]. The JIRA issue where we were converted is
[2].
Unfortunately I will not be able to experiment much (if at all) with this
until tomorrow night. Feel free to reply to this thread if you have
problems migrating. I'll try to help work through those. For now you are
not allowed to push any commits that have the Git committer field set to a
non-Apache email address, although I hope that requirement will change very
soon.
Is there a volunteer willing to get our build infra set up with the new Git
repo?
[1] http://git-wip-us.apache.org/#committers-getting-started
[2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4204
--
Jeremy Thomerson
http://wickettraining.com
*Need a CMS for Wicket? Use Brix! http://brixcms.org*
Re: Wicket source code moved to Git
Posted by Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 10:57 AM, Bertrand Guay-Paquet
<be...@step.polymtl.ca> wrote:
> With the move to Git, should user-contributed patches be provided using pull
> requests instead of patches in JIRA?
i think until we have the github workflow worked out and documented it
will be easier to stick with patches in jira. we will announce on the
list when we are ready to accept github pull requests.
> Also, with SVN it was possible to view the changes related to an issue in
> the "subversion commits" tab of JIRA. Will it be possible to have this
> information with Git?
infra is working on this afaik.
-igor
>
> Bertrand
>
>
> On 20/12/2011 11:04 PM, Jeremy Thomerson wrote:
>>
>> Our SVN repository is now set read-only. For information about getting
>> started with Git @ ASF, see [1]. The JIRA issue where we were converted
>> is
>> [2].
>>
>> Unfortunately I will not be able to experiment much (if at all) with this
>> until tomorrow night. Feel free to reply to this thread if you have
>> problems migrating. I'll try to help work through those. For now you are
>> not allowed to push any commits that have the Git committer field set to a
>> non-Apache email address, although I hope that requirement will change
>> very
>> soon.
>>
>> Is there a volunteer willing to get our build infra set up with the new
>> Git
>> repo?
>>
>> [1] http://git-wip-us.apache.org/#committers-getting-started
>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4204
>>
>
Re: Wicket source code moved to Git
Posted by Bertrand Guay-Paquet <be...@step.polymtl.ca>.
With the move to Git, should user-contributed patches be provided using
pull requests instead of patches in JIRA?
Also, with SVN it was possible to view the changes related to an issue
in the "subversion commits" tab of JIRA. Will it be possible to have
this information with Git?
Bertrand
On 20/12/2011 11:04 PM, Jeremy Thomerson wrote:
> Our SVN repository is now set read-only. For information about getting
> started with Git @ ASF, see [1]. The JIRA issue where we were converted is
> [2].
>
> Unfortunately I will not be able to experiment much (if at all) with this
> until tomorrow night. Feel free to reply to this thread if you have
> problems migrating. I'll try to help work through those. For now you are
> not allowed to push any commits that have the Git committer field set to a
> non-Apache email address, although I hope that requirement will change very
> soon.
>
> Is there a volunteer willing to get our build infra set up with the new Git
> repo?
>
> [1] http://git-wip-us.apache.org/#committers-getting-started
> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4204
>
Re: Wicket source code moved to Git
Posted by Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com>.
renamed trunk to master and set master as repo's default branch
-igor
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 8:04 PM, Jeremy Thomerson
<je...@wickettraining.com> wrote:
> Our SVN repository is now set read-only. For information about getting
> started with Git @ ASF, see [1]. The JIRA issue where we were converted is
> [2].
>
> Unfortunately I will not be able to experiment much (if at all) with this
> until tomorrow night. Feel free to reply to this thread if you have
> problems migrating. I'll try to help work through those. For now you are
> not allowed to push any commits that have the Git committer field set to a
> non-Apache email address, although I hope that requirement will change very
> soon.
>
> Is there a volunteer willing to get our build infra set up with the new Git
> repo?
>
> [1] http://git-wip-us.apache.org/#committers-getting-started
> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4204
>
> --
> Jeremy Thomerson
> http://wickettraining.com
> *Need a CMS for Wicket? Use Brix! http://brixcms.org*
Re: Wicket source code moved to Git
Posted by Jeremy Thomerson <je...@wickettraining.com>.
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com>wrote:
> hmm i use EGit but some how i always get "not authorized" if i try to push
> something
> I am quite sure the username/password is correct, but will recheck it, i
> use this url:
>
> https://jcompagner@git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket.git
>
URL is correct. Pushing worked for me (I took your URL, changed to my UN,
cloned, committed, pushed). Password might be wrong.
--
Jeremy Thomerson
http://wickettraining.com
*Need a CMS for Wicket? Use Brix! http://brixcms.org*
Re: Wicket source code moved to Git
Posted by Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 8:40 PM, Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> hmm i use EGit but some how i always get "not authorized" if i try to push
> something
> I am quite sure the username/password is correct, but will recheck it, i
> use this url:
>
> https://jcompagner@git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket.git
can you try with the command line git client too ?
I verified that I can push with my credentials from console and from
Intellij IDEA
I also configured my credentials in ~/.netrc as described in the docs
for committers
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 19:26, Jeremy Thomerson
> <je...@wickettraining.com>wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 11:46 PM, Jeremy Thomerson <
>> jeremy@wickettraining.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 11:20 PM, Clint Checketts <checketts@gmail.com
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >> Jeremy,
>> >>
>> >> Will Git development mimic the current subversion workflow, or will we
>> see
>> >> we see a more Git-ish way like 'git flow'? See-
>> >> http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/
>> >
>> >
>> > I think at least the core developers are already trying to adopt a more
>> > git-like work flow. Look at some of the ajax/JS stuff that happened on
>> GH
>> > prior to being merged into SVN. I'm definitely in favor of a more
>> > "Git-ish" way of doing things.
>> >
>> >
>> >> I realize that likely the answer is 'we don't know yet', so I'd like to
>> >> get
>> >> the conversation going.
>> >>
>> >
>> > I'd suggest: give us through the weekend for the committers to get git
>> > (hehe pun) setup and in use, then let's start a separate discussion. I
>> > also say this because of a very large thread on infrastructure-dev right
>> > now [1] about the current git hook that requires all committers to have
>> an @
>> > apache.org email address, which means for me to pull from your GH repo,
>> > for instance, I'd need to rewrite the history some. I think that this
>> > requirement will go away (the message I linked to is the first with real
>> > weight that says it can go away), but whatever the outcome of that thread
>> > is will have a major impact on our git-flow. Involvement with that
>> ongoing
>> > thread among other conversations has kept from from actually playing with
>> > our git repo. I hope the distraction will be gone soon.
>> >
>> > [1] http://markmail.org/message/jsnmxdzf5qkkrvwg
>>
>>
>>
>> FYI... here's an update that the $contributorEmail =~
>> /.*@apache.org/requirement is now gone. See [2]
>>
>> This should make it easier to integrate a standard git workflow where we
>> can merge branches from various users. Of course, the committers still
>> need to do our due diligence to ensure code provenance.
>>
>> [2] http://markmail.org/message/3v47l7747xntqreq
>>
>> --
>> Jeremy Thomerson
>> http://wickettraining.com
>> *Need a CMS for Wicket? Use Brix! http://brixcms.org*
>>
--
Martin Grigorov
jWeekend
Training, Consulting, Development
http://jWeekend.com
Re: Wicket source code moved to Git
Posted by Johan Compagner <jc...@gmail.com>.
hmm i use EGit but some how i always get "not authorized" if i try to push
something
I am quite sure the username/password is correct, but will recheck it, i
use this url:
https://jcompagner@git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket.git
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 19:26, Jeremy Thomerson
<je...@wickettraining.com>wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 11:46 PM, Jeremy Thomerson <
> jeremy@wickettraining.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 11:20 PM, Clint Checketts <checketts@gmail.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Jeremy,
> >>
> >> Will Git development mimic the current subversion workflow, or will we
> see
> >> we see a more Git-ish way like 'git flow'? See-
> >> http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/
> >
> >
> > I think at least the core developers are already trying to adopt a more
> > git-like work flow. Look at some of the ajax/JS stuff that happened on
> GH
> > prior to being merged into SVN. I'm definitely in favor of a more
> > "Git-ish" way of doing things.
> >
> >
> >> I realize that likely the answer is 'we don't know yet', so I'd like to
> >> get
> >> the conversation going.
> >>
> >
> > I'd suggest: give us through the weekend for the committers to get git
> > (hehe pun) setup and in use, then let's start a separate discussion. I
> > also say this because of a very large thread on infrastructure-dev right
> > now [1] about the current git hook that requires all committers to have
> an @
> > apache.org email address, which means for me to pull from your GH repo,
> > for instance, I'd need to rewrite the history some. I think that this
> > requirement will go away (the message I linked to is the first with real
> > weight that says it can go away), but whatever the outcome of that thread
> > is will have a major impact on our git-flow. Involvement with that
> ongoing
> > thread among other conversations has kept from from actually playing with
> > our git repo. I hope the distraction will be gone soon.
> >
> > [1] http://markmail.org/message/jsnmxdzf5qkkrvwg
>
>
>
> FYI... here's an update that the $contributorEmail =~
> /.*@apache.org/requirement is now gone. See [2]
>
> This should make it easier to integrate a standard git workflow where we
> can merge branches from various users. Of course, the committers still
> need to do our due diligence to ensure code provenance.
>
> [2] http://markmail.org/message/3v47l7747xntqreq
>
> --
> Jeremy Thomerson
> http://wickettraining.com
> *Need a CMS for Wicket? Use Brix! http://brixcms.org*
>
Re: Wicket source code moved to Git
Posted by Jeremy Thomerson <je...@wickettraining.com>.
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 11:46 PM, Jeremy Thomerson <
jeremy@wickettraining.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 11:20 PM, Clint Checketts <ch...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Jeremy,
>>
>> Will Git development mimic the current subversion workflow, or will we see
>> we see a more Git-ish way like 'git flow'? See-
>> http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/
>
>
> I think at least the core developers are already trying to adopt a more
> git-like work flow. Look at some of the ajax/JS stuff that happened on GH
> prior to being merged into SVN. I'm definitely in favor of a more
> "Git-ish" way of doing things.
>
>
>> I realize that likely the answer is 'we don't know yet', so I'd like to
>> get
>> the conversation going.
>>
>
> I'd suggest: give us through the weekend for the committers to get git
> (hehe pun) setup and in use, then let's start a separate discussion. I
> also say this because of a very large thread on infrastructure-dev right
> now [1] about the current git hook that requires all committers to have an @
> apache.org email address, which means for me to pull from your GH repo,
> for instance, I'd need to rewrite the history some. I think that this
> requirement will go away (the message I linked to is the first with real
> weight that says it can go away), but whatever the outcome of that thread
> is will have a major impact on our git-flow. Involvement with that ongoing
> thread among other conversations has kept from from actually playing with
> our git repo. I hope the distraction will be gone soon.
>
> [1] http://markmail.org/message/jsnmxdzf5qkkrvwg
FYI... here's an update that the $contributorEmail =~
/.*@apache.org/requirement is now gone. See [2]
This should make it easier to integrate a standard git workflow where we
can merge branches from various users. Of course, the committers still
need to do our due diligence to ensure code provenance.
[2] http://markmail.org/message/3v47l7747xntqreq
--
Jeremy Thomerson
http://wickettraining.com
*Need a CMS for Wicket? Use Brix! http://brixcms.org*
Re: Wicket source code moved to Git
Posted by Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com>.
also note that for some clones "trunk" is still the default branch. be
sure to 'git checkout master' which is where 6.0 stuff lives.
-igor
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 8:30 AM, Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 6:26 PM, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> not sure if git://git.apache.org/wicket.git is kept up with commits to
>> git-wip-us....
>
> This is what one of the INFRA members said but later we realized that
> these mirrors doesn't work at the moment against WIP repo.
> Users can use http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket.git
> Note, that it is HTTP, without S.
>
>>
>> i think for users
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 1:04 AM, Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> The most important info is missing - the checkout url! :-)
>>>
>>> For devs:
>>> https://YOUR_APACHE_USERNAME@git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket.git
>>>
>>> For users:
>>> git://git.apache.org/wicket.git
>>> or
>>> https://github.com/apache/wicket
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 6:46 AM, Jeremy Thomerson
>>> <je...@wickettraining.com> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 11:20 PM, Clint Checketts <ch...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Jeremy,
>>>>>
>>>>> Will Git development mimic the current subversion workflow, or will we see
>>>>> we see a more Git-ish way like 'git flow'? See-
>>>>> http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think at least the core developers are already trying to adopt a more
>>>> git-like work flow. Look at some of the ajax/JS stuff that happened on GH
>>>> prior to being merged into SVN. I'm definitely in favor of a more
>>>> "Git-ish" way of doing things.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I realize that likely the answer is 'we don't know yet', so I'd like to get
>>>>> the conversation going.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'd suggest: give us through the weekend for the committers to get git
>>>> (hehe pun) setup and in use, then let's start a separate discussion. I
>>>> also say this because of a very large thread on infrastructure-dev right
>>>> now [1] about the current git hook that requires all committers to have an @
>>>> apache.org email address, which means for me to pull from your GH repo, for
>>>> instance, I'd need to rewrite the history some. I think that this
>>>> requirement will go away (the message I linked to is the first with real
>>>> weight that says it can go away), but whatever the outcome of that thread
>>>> is will have a major impact on our git-flow. Involvement with that ongoing
>>>> thread among other conversations has kept from from actually playing with
>>>> our git repo. I hope the distraction will be gone soon.
>>>>
>>>> [1] http://markmail.org/message/jsnmxdzf5qkkrvwg
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Jeremy Thomerson
>>>> http://wickettraining.com
>>>> *Need a CMS for Wicket? Use Brix! http://brixcms.org*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Martin Grigorov
>>> jWeekend
>>> Training, Consulting, Development
>>> http://jWeekend.com
>
>
>
> --
> Martin Grigorov
> jWeekend
> Training, Consulting, Development
> http://jWeekend.com
Re: Wicket source code moved to Git
Posted by Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 6:26 PM, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> not sure if git://git.apache.org/wicket.git is kept up with commits to
> git-wip-us....
This is what one of the INFRA members said but later we realized that
these mirrors doesn't work at the moment against WIP repo.
Users can use http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket.git
Note, that it is HTTP, without S.
>
> i think for users
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 1:04 AM, Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org> wrote:
>> The most important info is missing - the checkout url! :-)
>>
>> For devs:
>> https://YOUR_APACHE_USERNAME@git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket.git
>>
>> For users:
>> git://git.apache.org/wicket.git
>> or
>> https://github.com/apache/wicket
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 6:46 AM, Jeremy Thomerson
>> <je...@wickettraining.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 11:20 PM, Clint Checketts <ch...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Jeremy,
>>>>
>>>> Will Git development mimic the current subversion workflow, or will we see
>>>> we see a more Git-ish way like 'git flow'? See-
>>>> http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/
>>>
>>>
>>> I think at least the core developers are already trying to adopt a more
>>> git-like work flow. Look at some of the ajax/JS stuff that happened on GH
>>> prior to being merged into SVN. I'm definitely in favor of a more
>>> "Git-ish" way of doing things.
>>>
>>>
>>>> I realize that likely the answer is 'we don't know yet', so I'd like to get
>>>> the conversation going.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'd suggest: give us through the weekend for the committers to get git
>>> (hehe pun) setup and in use, then let's start a separate discussion. I
>>> also say this because of a very large thread on infrastructure-dev right
>>> now [1] about the current git hook that requires all committers to have an @
>>> apache.org email address, which means for me to pull from your GH repo, for
>>> instance, I'd need to rewrite the history some. I think that this
>>> requirement will go away (the message I linked to is the first with real
>>> weight that says it can go away), but whatever the outcome of that thread
>>> is will have a major impact on our git-flow. Involvement with that ongoing
>>> thread among other conversations has kept from from actually playing with
>>> our git repo. I hope the distraction will be gone soon.
>>>
>>> [1] http://markmail.org/message/jsnmxdzf5qkkrvwg
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jeremy Thomerson
>>> http://wickettraining.com
>>> *Need a CMS for Wicket? Use Brix! http://brixcms.org*
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Martin Grigorov
>> jWeekend
>> Training, Consulting, Development
>> http://jWeekend.com
--
Martin Grigorov
jWeekend
Training, Consulting, Development
http://jWeekend.com
Re: Wicket source code moved to Git
Posted by Andrea Del Bene <ad...@ciseonweb.it>.
Thank you Martin and Igor, I've learnt a bit more of Git today :-)!
> Hi Andrea,
>
> I forgot /pom.xml with the dependencyManagement for this dependency
> but later Sven fixed it:
> http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket/repo?p=wicket.git;a=commit;h=0febdc400d2b70c9f15f340bead0093d753ab0e4
>
> The build is OK now - locally, Jenkins and BuildBot
> (http://ci.apache.org/builders/wicket-master)
>
> On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 12:25 PM, Andrea Del Bene<ad...@ciseonweb.it> wrote:
>
>
Re: Wicket source code moved to Git
Posted by Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>.
Hi Andrea,
I forgot /pom.xml with the dependencyManagement for this dependency
but later Sven fixed it:
http://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket/repo?p=wicket.git;a=commit;h=0febdc400d2b70c9f15f340bead0093d753ab0e4
The build is OK now - locally, Jenkins and BuildBot
(http://ci.apache.org/builders/wicket-master)
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 12:25 PM, Andrea Del Bene <ad...@ciseonweb.it> wrote:
> Doh!...I get the same error working with Subversion repository. The
> exception is complaining of missing version of inject.jar:
>
> Validation Messages:
>
> [0] 'dependencies.dependency.version' is missing for
> javax.inject:javax.inject:jar
>
> Does anybody have the same problem and know how to solve it?
>
>> make sure you are on the master branch - that is wicket 6.0
>>
>> -igor
>
>
--
Martin Grigorov
jWeekend
Training, Consulting, Development
http://jWeekend.com
Re: Wicket source code moved to Git
Posted by Andrea Del Bene <ad...@ciseonweb.it>.
Doh!...I get the same error working with Subversion repository. The
exception is complaining of missing version of inject.jar:
Validation Messages:
[0] 'dependencies.dependency.version' is missing for
javax.inject:javax.inject:jar
Does anybody have the same problem and know how to solve it?
> make sure you are on the master branch - that is wicket 6.0
>
> -igor
Re: Wicket source code moved to Git
Posted by Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com>.
make sure you are on the master branch - that is wicket 6.0
-igor
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 1:15 PM, Andrea Del Bene <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've cloned the given repository, but I get the following exception running
> maven:
>
> org.apache.maven.reactor.MavenExecutionException: Failed to validate POM for
> project org.apache.wicket:wicket-ioc at
> /home/andrea/WicketBuild/wicket/wicket-ioc/pom.xml
>
> The other Wicket modules seem to work fine with Maven.
>
> Have I missed something? I'm working under Ubuntu 11.10 64 bit.
>
>> i think for users its fine to git clone
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket.git
>>
>> -igor
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 8:26 AM, Igor Vaynberg<ig...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>
Re: Wicket source code moved to Git
Posted by Andrea Del Bene <an...@gmail.com>.
I've cloned the given repository, but I get the following exception
running maven:
org.apache.maven.reactor.MavenExecutionException: Failed to validate POM
for project org.apache.wicket:wicket-ioc at
/home/andrea/WicketBuild/wicket/wicket-ioc/pom.xml
The other Wicket modules seem to work fine with Maven.
Have I missed something? I'm working under Ubuntu 11.10 64 bit.
> i think for users its fine to git clone
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket.git
>
> -igor
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 8:26 AM, Igor Vaynberg<ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
Re: Wicket source code moved to Git
Posted by Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com>.
i think for users its fine to git clone
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket.git
-igor
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 8:26 AM, Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com> wrote:
> not sure if git://git.apache.org/wicket.git is kept up with commits to
> git-wip-us....
>
> i think for users
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 1:04 AM, Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org> wrote:
>> The most important info is missing - the checkout url! :-)
>>
>> For devs:
>> https://YOUR_APACHE_USERNAME@git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket.git
>>
>> For users:
>> git://git.apache.org/wicket.git
>> or
>> https://github.com/apache/wicket
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 6:46 AM, Jeremy Thomerson
>> <je...@wickettraining.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 11:20 PM, Clint Checketts <ch...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Jeremy,
>>>>
>>>> Will Git development mimic the current subversion workflow, or will we see
>>>> we see a more Git-ish way like 'git flow'? See-
>>>> http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/
>>>
>>>
>>> I think at least the core developers are already trying to adopt a more
>>> git-like work flow. Look at some of the ajax/JS stuff that happened on GH
>>> prior to being merged into SVN. I'm definitely in favor of a more
>>> "Git-ish" way of doing things.
>>>
>>>
>>>> I realize that likely the answer is 'we don't know yet', so I'd like to get
>>>> the conversation going.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'd suggest: give us through the weekend for the committers to get git
>>> (hehe pun) setup and in use, then let's start a separate discussion. I
>>> also say this because of a very large thread on infrastructure-dev right
>>> now [1] about the current git hook that requires all committers to have an @
>>> apache.org email address, which means for me to pull from your GH repo, for
>>> instance, I'd need to rewrite the history some. I think that this
>>> requirement will go away (the message I linked to is the first with real
>>> weight that says it can go away), but whatever the outcome of that thread
>>> is will have a major impact on our git-flow. Involvement with that ongoing
>>> thread among other conversations has kept from from actually playing with
>>> our git repo. I hope the distraction will be gone soon.
>>>
>>> [1] http://markmail.org/message/jsnmxdzf5qkkrvwg
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jeremy Thomerson
>>> http://wickettraining.com
>>> *Need a CMS for Wicket? Use Brix! http://brixcms.org*
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Martin Grigorov
>> jWeekend
>> Training, Consulting, Development
>> http://jWeekend.com
Re: Wicket source code moved to Git
Posted by Igor Vaynberg <ig...@gmail.com>.
not sure if git://git.apache.org/wicket.git is kept up with commits to
git-wip-us....
i think for users
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 1:04 AM, Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org> wrote:
> The most important info is missing - the checkout url! :-)
>
> For devs:
> https://YOUR_APACHE_USERNAME@git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket.git
>
> For users:
> git://git.apache.org/wicket.git
> or
> https://github.com/apache/wicket
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 6:46 AM, Jeremy Thomerson
> <je...@wickettraining.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 11:20 PM, Clint Checketts <ch...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Jeremy,
>>>
>>> Will Git development mimic the current subversion workflow, or will we see
>>> we see a more Git-ish way like 'git flow'? See-
>>> http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/
>>
>>
>> I think at least the core developers are already trying to adopt a more
>> git-like work flow. Look at some of the ajax/JS stuff that happened on GH
>> prior to being merged into SVN. I'm definitely in favor of a more
>> "Git-ish" way of doing things.
>>
>>
>>> I realize that likely the answer is 'we don't know yet', so I'd like to get
>>> the conversation going.
>>>
>>
>> I'd suggest: give us through the weekend for the committers to get git
>> (hehe pun) setup and in use, then let's start a separate discussion. I
>> also say this because of a very large thread on infrastructure-dev right
>> now [1] about the current git hook that requires all committers to have an @
>> apache.org email address, which means for me to pull from your GH repo, for
>> instance, I'd need to rewrite the history some. I think that this
>> requirement will go away (the message I linked to is the first with real
>> weight that says it can go away), but whatever the outcome of that thread
>> is will have a major impact on our git-flow. Involvement with that ongoing
>> thread among other conversations has kept from from actually playing with
>> our git repo. I hope the distraction will be gone soon.
>>
>> [1] http://markmail.org/message/jsnmxdzf5qkkrvwg
>>
>> --
>> Jeremy Thomerson
>> http://wickettraining.com
>> *Need a CMS for Wicket? Use Brix! http://brixcms.org*
>
>
>
> --
> Martin Grigorov
> jWeekend
> Training, Consulting, Development
> http://jWeekend.com
Re: Wicket source code moved to Git
Posted by Martijn Dashorst <ma...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org> wrote:
> The most important info is missing - the checkout url! :-)
>
> For devs:
> https://YOUR_APACHE_USERNAME@git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket.git
If you set up the .netrc like the git @ apache document states, you
should not provide your apache username in the URL
Martijn
Re: Wicket source code moved to Git
Posted by Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>.
The most important info is missing - the checkout url! :-)
For devs:
https://YOUR_APACHE_USERNAME@git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/wicket.git
For users:
git://git.apache.org/wicket.git
or
https://github.com/apache/wicket
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 6:46 AM, Jeremy Thomerson
<je...@wickettraining.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 11:20 PM, Clint Checketts <ch...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Jeremy,
>>
>> Will Git development mimic the current subversion workflow, or will we see
>> we see a more Git-ish way like 'git flow'? See-
>> http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/
>
>
> I think at least the core developers are already trying to adopt a more
> git-like work flow. Look at some of the ajax/JS stuff that happened on GH
> prior to being merged into SVN. I'm definitely in favor of a more
> "Git-ish" way of doing things.
>
>
>> I realize that likely the answer is 'we don't know yet', so I'd like to get
>> the conversation going.
>>
>
> I'd suggest: give us through the weekend for the committers to get git
> (hehe pun) setup and in use, then let's start a separate discussion. I
> also say this because of a very large thread on infrastructure-dev right
> now [1] about the current git hook that requires all committers to have an @
> apache.org email address, which means for me to pull from your GH repo, for
> instance, I'd need to rewrite the history some. I think that this
> requirement will go away (the message I linked to is the first with real
> weight that says it can go away), but whatever the outcome of that thread
> is will have a major impact on our git-flow. Involvement with that ongoing
> thread among other conversations has kept from from actually playing with
> our git repo. I hope the distraction will be gone soon.
>
> [1] http://markmail.org/message/jsnmxdzf5qkkrvwg
>
> --
> Jeremy Thomerson
> http://wickettraining.com
> *Need a CMS for Wicket? Use Brix! http://brixcms.org*
--
Martin Grigorov
jWeekend
Training, Consulting, Development
http://jWeekend.com
Re: Wicket source code moved to Git
Posted by Jeremy Thomerson <je...@wickettraining.com>.
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 11:20 PM, Clint Checketts <ch...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Jeremy,
>
> Will Git development mimic the current subversion workflow, or will we see
> we see a more Git-ish way like 'git flow'? See-
> http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/
I think at least the core developers are already trying to adopt a more
git-like work flow. Look at some of the ajax/JS stuff that happened on GH
prior to being merged into SVN. I'm definitely in favor of a more
"Git-ish" way of doing things.
> I realize that likely the answer is 'we don't know yet', so I'd like to get
> the conversation going.
>
I'd suggest: give us through the weekend for the committers to get git
(hehe pun) setup and in use, then let's start a separate discussion. I
also say this because of a very large thread on infrastructure-dev right
now [1] about the current git hook that requires all committers to have an @
apache.org email address, which means for me to pull from your GH repo, for
instance, I'd need to rewrite the history some. I think that this
requirement will go away (the message I linked to is the first with real
weight that says it can go away), but whatever the outcome of that thread
is will have a major impact on our git-flow. Involvement with that ongoing
thread among other conversations has kept from from actually playing with
our git repo. I hope the distraction will be gone soon.
[1] http://markmail.org/message/jsnmxdzf5qkkrvwg
--
Jeremy Thomerson
http://wickettraining.com
*Need a CMS for Wicket? Use Brix! http://brixcms.org*
Re: Wicket source code moved to Git
Posted by Clint Checketts <ch...@gmail.com>.
Jeremy,
Will Git development mimic the current subversion workflow, or will we see
we see a more Git-ish way like 'git flow'? See-
http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/
I realize that likely the answer is 'we don't know yet', so I'd like to get
the conversation going.
-Clint
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 10:04 PM, Jeremy Thomerson <
jeremy@wickettraining.com> wrote:
> Our SVN repository is now set read-only. For information about getting
> started with Git @ ASF, see [1]. The JIRA issue where we were converted is
> [2].
>
> Unfortunately I will not be able to experiment much (if at all) with this
> until tomorrow night. Feel free to reply to this thread if you have
> problems migrating. I'll try to help work through those. For now you are
> not allowed to push any commits that have the Git committer field set to a
> non-Apache email address, although I hope that requirement will change very
> soon.
>
> Is there a volunteer willing to get our build infra set up with the new Git
> repo?
>
> [1] http://git-wip-us.apache.org/#committers-getting-started
> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-4204
>
> --
> Jeremy Thomerson
> http://wickettraining.com
> *Need a CMS for Wicket? Use Brix! http://brixcms.org*
>