You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@activemq.apache.org by Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> on 2015/05/21 23:42:26 UTC
[DISCUSSION] Renaming github mirror
I need some help with the discussion I'm having at:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-9543
If you go to the artemis github mirror, you will see: mirrored from
git://git.apache.org/activemq-6.git
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis
It happens that per what I heard from Infra, the only way to do that
would be to recreate the repo. Meaning the Pull Request IDs would
restart, meaning we would lost any previous discussions we had on
github.
Although I'm not sure that's really a big deal, since these
discussions are all backed up at the dev list (the dev list has been
hearing the PR comments).
So, is there anyone against recreating the repo?
I asked Infra to wait until tomorrow.
Re: [DISCUSSION] Renaming github mirror
Posted by Thiago Kronig <th...@gmail.com>.
Okay. Thanks!
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 11:55 PM Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> As Geofrey said on the infra JIRA:
>
> " Just waiting on Github to do their daily scrape of git.apache.org"
>
> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 9:41 PM, Thiago Kronig <th...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > 404: https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/
> >
> >
> > On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 9:18 PM Clebert Suconic <
> clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> too late :)
> >>
> >> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:53 PM, Robbie Gemmell
> >> <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > Err, I'd maybe hold up until tomorrow and give other folks a chance to
> >> > chime in, the below was only one persons opinion hehe.
> >> >
> >> > When I say 'now' vs 'later' I just meant the immediate term verus
> >> > months from now. I dont think its that big a deal that it has to
> >> > happen *right now* :)
> >> >
> >> > Robbie
> >> >
> >> > On 22 May 2015 at 00:30, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >> Ok, I won't even wait for other people's feedback... I will just go
> >> >> ahead and ask them to do it. Better now than later.
> >> >>
> >> >> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:03 PM, Robbie Gemmell
> >> >> <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>> As the JIRA project has just been renamed today and no release has
> >> >>> occurred yet, I think now would probably be the best time to ever
> >> >>> recreate the mirror.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I dont think the pull requests numbers beginning again is that big
> an
> >> >>> issue. The comments are available on the dev list as you said, and
> >> >>> also any JIRAs the PR referenced, plus the commits made will remain
> >> >>> for inspection. There will obviously be some overlap with the old
> >> >>> numbers, but I dont think that should be too confusing as the dates
> >> >>> will make it fairly easy to tell whether it is a current reference
> or
> >> >>> an old one, plus any JIRA references will further help distinguish
> >> >>> them (given the old PR commits would refer to the old ACTIVEMQ6 JIRA
> >> >>> key, rather than the new ARTEMIS key).
> >> >>>
> >> >>> One other issue to note is that I believe forks of the current
> GitHub
> >> >>> mirror will be re-parented against one of the remaining fork, so
> >> >>> people might need to recreate their forks against the main repo
> again.
> >> >>> I dont see that as too big a deal either though, and again better
> done
> >> >>> now than later.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Robbie
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On 21 May 2015 at 22:42, Clebert Suconic <clebert.suconic@gmail.com
> >
> >> wrote:
> >> >>>> I need some help with the discussion I'm having at:
> >> >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-9543
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> If you go to the artemis github mirror, you will see: mirrored from
> >> >>>> git://git.apache.org/activemq-6.git
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> It happens that per what I heard from Infra, the only way to do
> that
> >> >>>> would be to recreate the repo. Meaning the Pull Request IDs would
> >> >>>> restart, meaning we would lost any previous discussions we had on
> >> >>>> github.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Although I'm not sure that's really a big deal, since these
> >> >>>> discussions are all backed up at the dev list (the dev list has
> been
> >> >>>> hearing the PR comments).
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> So, is there anyone against recreating the repo?
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> I asked Infra to wait until tomorrow.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Clebert Suconic
> >> >> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
> >> >> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Clebert Suconic
> >> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
> >> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
> >>
>
>
>
> --
> Clebert Suconic
> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
>
Re: [DISCUSSION] Renaming github mirror
Posted by Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com>.
As Geofrey said on the infra JIRA:
" Just waiting on Github to do their daily scrape of git.apache.org"
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 9:41 PM, Thiago Kronig <th...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 404: https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/
>
>
> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 9:18 PM Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> too late :)
>>
>> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:53 PM, Robbie Gemmell
>> <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Err, I'd maybe hold up until tomorrow and give other folks a chance to
>> > chime in, the below was only one persons opinion hehe.
>> >
>> > When I say 'now' vs 'later' I just meant the immediate term verus
>> > months from now. I dont think its that big a deal that it has to
>> > happen *right now* :)
>> >
>> > Robbie
>> >
>> > On 22 May 2015 at 00:30, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >> Ok, I won't even wait for other people's feedback... I will just go
>> >> ahead and ask them to do it. Better now than later.
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:03 PM, Robbie Gemmell
>> >> <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> As the JIRA project has just been renamed today and no release has
>> >>> occurred yet, I think now would probably be the best time to ever
>> >>> recreate the mirror.
>> >>>
>> >>> I dont think the pull requests numbers beginning again is that big an
>> >>> issue. The comments are available on the dev list as you said, and
>> >>> also any JIRAs the PR referenced, plus the commits made will remain
>> >>> for inspection. There will obviously be some overlap with the old
>> >>> numbers, but I dont think that should be too confusing as the dates
>> >>> will make it fairly easy to tell whether it is a current reference or
>> >>> an old one, plus any JIRA references will further help distinguish
>> >>> them (given the old PR commits would refer to the old ACTIVEMQ6 JIRA
>> >>> key, rather than the new ARTEMIS key).
>> >>>
>> >>> One other issue to note is that I believe forks of the current GitHub
>> >>> mirror will be re-parented against one of the remaining fork, so
>> >>> people might need to recreate their forks against the main repo again.
>> >>> I dont see that as too big a deal either though, and again better done
>> >>> now than later.
>> >>>
>> >>> Robbie
>> >>>
>> >>> On 21 May 2015 at 22:42, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>>> I need some help with the discussion I'm having at:
>> >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-9543
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> If you go to the artemis github mirror, you will see: mirrored from
>> >>>> git://git.apache.org/activemq-6.git
>> >>>>
>> >>>> https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> It happens that per what I heard from Infra, the only way to do that
>> >>>> would be to recreate the repo. Meaning the Pull Request IDs would
>> >>>> restart, meaning we would lost any previous discussions we had on
>> >>>> github.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Although I'm not sure that's really a big deal, since these
>> >>>> discussions are all backed up at the dev list (the dev list has been
>> >>>> hearing the PR comments).
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> So, is there anyone against recreating the repo?
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> I asked Infra to wait until tomorrow.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Clebert Suconic
>> >> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
>> >> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Clebert Suconic
>> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
>> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
>>
--
Clebert Suconic
http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
Re: [DISCUSSION] Renaming github mirror
Posted by Thiago Kronig <th...@gmail.com>.
404: https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 9:18 PM Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> too late :)
>
> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:53 PM, Robbie Gemmell
> <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Err, I'd maybe hold up until tomorrow and give other folks a chance to
> > chime in, the below was only one persons opinion hehe.
> >
> > When I say 'now' vs 'later' I just meant the immediate term verus
> > months from now. I dont think its that big a deal that it has to
> > happen *right now* :)
> >
> > Robbie
> >
> > On 22 May 2015 at 00:30, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> Ok, I won't even wait for other people's feedback... I will just go
> >> ahead and ask them to do it. Better now than later.
> >>
> >> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:03 PM, Robbie Gemmell
> >> <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> As the JIRA project has just been renamed today and no release has
> >>> occurred yet, I think now would probably be the best time to ever
> >>> recreate the mirror.
> >>>
> >>> I dont think the pull requests numbers beginning again is that big an
> >>> issue. The comments are available on the dev list as you said, and
> >>> also any JIRAs the PR referenced, plus the commits made will remain
> >>> for inspection. There will obviously be some overlap with the old
> >>> numbers, but I dont think that should be too confusing as the dates
> >>> will make it fairly easy to tell whether it is a current reference or
> >>> an old one, plus any JIRA references will further help distinguish
> >>> them (given the old PR commits would refer to the old ACTIVEMQ6 JIRA
> >>> key, rather than the new ARTEMIS key).
> >>>
> >>> One other issue to note is that I believe forks of the current GitHub
> >>> mirror will be re-parented against one of the remaining fork, so
> >>> people might need to recreate their forks against the main repo again.
> >>> I dont see that as too big a deal either though, and again better done
> >>> now than later.
> >>>
> >>> Robbie
> >>>
> >>> On 21 May 2015 at 22:42, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>> I need some help with the discussion I'm having at:
> >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-9543
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> If you go to the artemis github mirror, you will see: mirrored from
> >>>> git://git.apache.org/activemq-6.git
> >>>>
> >>>> https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> It happens that per what I heard from Infra, the only way to do that
> >>>> would be to recreate the repo. Meaning the Pull Request IDs would
> >>>> restart, meaning we would lost any previous discussions we had on
> >>>> github.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Although I'm not sure that's really a big deal, since these
> >>>> discussions are all backed up at the dev list (the dev list has been
> >>>> hearing the PR comments).
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> So, is there anyone against recreating the repo?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I asked Infra to wait until tomorrow.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Clebert Suconic
> >> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
> >> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
>
>
>
> --
> Clebert Suconic
> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
>
Re: [DISCUSSION] Renaming github mirror
Posted by Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com>.
As Clebert said, Infra[structure] are the team that put together
and/or maintain the various services which the ASF run/depends on,
such as these mailing lists, the scm systems that host the project
code, the websites, the GitHub mirrors of our code, etc etc.
They are the folks behind various sites/bots/etc including these and
many others:
http://status.apache.org/
https://twitter.com/infrabot
https://blogs.apache.org/infra/
https://reference.apache.org/
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA
Robbie
On 22 May 2015 at 18:39, Mark Frazier <mm...@me.com> wrote:
> Robbie, I’m still rather new to Apache and the open source community, so I’m a little confused.
>
> When you say “Infra”, what exactly are you referring to? Is this a part of the Apache team?
>
> Thanks
>
>> On May 22, 2015, at 7:52 AM, Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Infra have updated the 3 repos/mirrors so they now say ActiveMQ Artemis.
>>
>> Robbie
>>
>> On 22 May 2015 at 09:20, Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> The GitHub mirror has been recreated, and now correctly says it is
>>> mirroring from the git://git.apache.org/activemq-artemis.git asf
>>> mirror.
>>>
>>> It does however still have a description that it is a "Mirror of
>>> Apache ActiveMQ 6". That is presumably because http://git.apache.org
>>> still shows a description of "Apache ActiveMQ 6" against its mirror,
>>> which in turn is presumably because the canonical repo at
>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=activemq-artemis.git does
>>> too.
>>>
>>> I would hope infra can update the descriptions without recreating the
>>> mirrors again, I'll ask and see.
>>>
>>> On 22 May 2015 at 01:16, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> too late :)
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:53 PM, Robbie Gemmell
>>>> <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Err, I'd maybe hold up until tomorrow and give other folks a chance to
>>>>> chime in, the below was only one persons opinion hehe.
>>>>>
>>>>> When I say 'now' vs 'later' I just meant the immediate term verus
>>>>> months from now. I dont think its that big a deal that it has to
>>>>> happen *right now* :)
>>>>>
>>>>> Robbie
>>>>>
>>>>> On 22 May 2015 at 00:30, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Ok, I won't even wait for other people's feedback... I will just go
>>>>>> ahead and ask them to do it. Better now than later.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:03 PM, Robbie Gemmell
>>>>>> <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> As the JIRA project has just been renamed today and no release has
>>>>>>> occurred yet, I think now would probably be the best time to ever
>>>>>>> recreate the mirror.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I dont think the pull requests numbers beginning again is that big an
>>>>>>> issue. The comments are available on the dev list as you said, and
>>>>>>> also any JIRAs the PR referenced, plus the commits made will remain
>>>>>>> for inspection. There will obviously be some overlap with the old
>>>>>>> numbers, but I dont think that should be too confusing as the dates
>>>>>>> will make it fairly easy to tell whether it is a current reference or
>>>>>>> an old one, plus any JIRA references will further help distinguish
>>>>>>> them (given the old PR commits would refer to the old ACTIVEMQ6 JIRA
>>>>>>> key, rather than the new ARTEMIS key).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> One other issue to note is that I believe forks of the current GitHub
>>>>>>> mirror will be re-parented against one of the remaining fork, so
>>>>>>> people might need to recreate their forks against the main repo again.
>>>>>>> I dont see that as too big a deal either though, and again better done
>>>>>>> now than later.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Robbie
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 21 May 2015 at 22:42, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I need some help with the discussion I'm having at:
>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-9543
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you go to the artemis github mirror, you will see: mirrored from
>>>>>>>> git://git.apache.org/activemq-6.git
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It happens that per what I heard from Infra, the only way to do that
>>>>>>>> would be to recreate the repo. Meaning the Pull Request IDs would
>>>>>>>> restart, meaning we would lost any previous discussions we had on
>>>>>>>> github.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Although I'm not sure that's really a big deal, since these
>>>>>>>> discussions are all backed up at the dev list (the dev list has been
>>>>>>>> hearing the PR comments).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So, is there anyone against recreating the repo?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I asked Infra to wait until tomorrow.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Clebert Suconic
>>>>>> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
>>>>>> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Clebert Suconic
>>>> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
>>>> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
>
Re: [DISCUSSION] Renaming github mirror
Posted by Mark Frazier <mm...@me.com>.
Thanks!
> On May 22, 2015, at 10:44 AM, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Infra (short for infra-structure) is a team at apache that handles
> things like JIRA, git integration... etc
>
> On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Mark Frazier <mm...@me.com> wrote:
>> Robbie, I’m still rather new to Apache and the open source community, so I’m a little confused.
>>
>> When you say “Infra”, what exactly are you referring to? Is this a part of the Apache team?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>> On May 22, 2015, at 7:52 AM, Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Infra have updated the 3 repos/mirrors so they now say ActiveMQ Artemis.
>>>
>>> Robbie
>>>
>>> On 22 May 2015 at 09:20, Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> The GitHub mirror has been recreated, and now correctly says it is
>>>> mirroring from the git://git.apache.org/activemq-artemis.git asf
>>>> mirror.
>>>>
>>>> It does however still have a description that it is a "Mirror of
>>>> Apache ActiveMQ 6". That is presumably because http://git.apache.org
>>>> still shows a description of "Apache ActiveMQ 6" against its mirror,
>>>> which in turn is presumably because the canonical repo at
>>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=activemq-artemis.git does
>>>> too.
>>>>
>>>> I would hope infra can update the descriptions without recreating the
>>>> mirrors again, I'll ask and see.
>>>>
>>>> On 22 May 2015 at 01:16, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> too late :)
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:53 PM, Robbie Gemmell
>>>>> <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Err, I'd maybe hold up until tomorrow and give other folks a chance to
>>>>>> chime in, the below was only one persons opinion hehe.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When I say 'now' vs 'later' I just meant the immediate term verus
>>>>>> months from now. I dont think its that big a deal that it has to
>>>>>> happen *right now* :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Robbie
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 22 May 2015 at 00:30, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Ok, I won't even wait for other people's feedback... I will just go
>>>>>>> ahead and ask them to do it. Better now than later.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:03 PM, Robbie Gemmell
>>>>>>> <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> As the JIRA project has just been renamed today and no release has
>>>>>>>> occurred yet, I think now would probably be the best time to ever
>>>>>>>> recreate the mirror.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I dont think the pull requests numbers beginning again is that big an
>>>>>>>> issue. The comments are available on the dev list as you said, and
>>>>>>>> also any JIRAs the PR referenced, plus the commits made will remain
>>>>>>>> for inspection. There will obviously be some overlap with the old
>>>>>>>> numbers, but I dont think that should be too confusing as the dates
>>>>>>>> will make it fairly easy to tell whether it is a current reference or
>>>>>>>> an old one, plus any JIRA references will further help distinguish
>>>>>>>> them (given the old PR commits would refer to the old ACTIVEMQ6 JIRA
>>>>>>>> key, rather than the new ARTEMIS key).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> One other issue to note is that I believe forks of the current GitHub
>>>>>>>> mirror will be re-parented against one of the remaining fork, so
>>>>>>>> people might need to recreate their forks against the main repo again.
>>>>>>>> I dont see that as too big a deal either though, and again better done
>>>>>>>> now than later.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Robbie
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 21 May 2015 at 22:42, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I need some help with the discussion I'm having at:
>>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-9543
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If you go to the artemis github mirror, you will see: mirrored from
>>>>>>>>> git://git.apache.org/activemq-6.git
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It happens that per what I heard from Infra, the only way to do that
>>>>>>>>> would be to recreate the repo. Meaning the Pull Request IDs would
>>>>>>>>> restart, meaning we would lost any previous discussions we had on
>>>>>>>>> github.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Although I'm not sure that's really a big deal, since these
>>>>>>>>> discussions are all backed up at the dev list (the dev list has been
>>>>>>>>> hearing the PR comments).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So, is there anyone against recreating the repo?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I asked Infra to wait until tomorrow.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Clebert Suconic
>>>>>>> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
>>>>>>> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Clebert Suconic
>>>>> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
>>>>> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Clebert Suconic
> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
Re: [DISCUSSION] Renaming github mirror
Posted by Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com>.
Infra (short for infra-structure) is a team at apache that handles
things like JIRA, git integration... etc
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Mark Frazier <mm...@me.com> wrote:
> Robbie, I’m still rather new to Apache and the open source community, so I’m a little confused.
>
> When you say “Infra”, what exactly are you referring to? Is this a part of the Apache team?
>
> Thanks
>
>> On May 22, 2015, at 7:52 AM, Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Infra have updated the 3 repos/mirrors so they now say ActiveMQ Artemis.
>>
>> Robbie
>>
>> On 22 May 2015 at 09:20, Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> The GitHub mirror has been recreated, and now correctly says it is
>>> mirroring from the git://git.apache.org/activemq-artemis.git asf
>>> mirror.
>>>
>>> It does however still have a description that it is a "Mirror of
>>> Apache ActiveMQ 6". That is presumably because http://git.apache.org
>>> still shows a description of "Apache ActiveMQ 6" against its mirror,
>>> which in turn is presumably because the canonical repo at
>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=activemq-artemis.git does
>>> too.
>>>
>>> I would hope infra can update the descriptions without recreating the
>>> mirrors again, I'll ask and see.
>>>
>>> On 22 May 2015 at 01:16, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> too late :)
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:53 PM, Robbie Gemmell
>>>> <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Err, I'd maybe hold up until tomorrow and give other folks a chance to
>>>>> chime in, the below was only one persons opinion hehe.
>>>>>
>>>>> When I say 'now' vs 'later' I just meant the immediate term verus
>>>>> months from now. I dont think its that big a deal that it has to
>>>>> happen *right now* :)
>>>>>
>>>>> Robbie
>>>>>
>>>>> On 22 May 2015 at 00:30, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Ok, I won't even wait for other people's feedback... I will just go
>>>>>> ahead and ask them to do it. Better now than later.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:03 PM, Robbie Gemmell
>>>>>> <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> As the JIRA project has just been renamed today and no release has
>>>>>>> occurred yet, I think now would probably be the best time to ever
>>>>>>> recreate the mirror.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I dont think the pull requests numbers beginning again is that big an
>>>>>>> issue. The comments are available on the dev list as you said, and
>>>>>>> also any JIRAs the PR referenced, plus the commits made will remain
>>>>>>> for inspection. There will obviously be some overlap with the old
>>>>>>> numbers, but I dont think that should be too confusing as the dates
>>>>>>> will make it fairly easy to tell whether it is a current reference or
>>>>>>> an old one, plus any JIRA references will further help distinguish
>>>>>>> them (given the old PR commits would refer to the old ACTIVEMQ6 JIRA
>>>>>>> key, rather than the new ARTEMIS key).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> One other issue to note is that I believe forks of the current GitHub
>>>>>>> mirror will be re-parented against one of the remaining fork, so
>>>>>>> people might need to recreate their forks against the main repo again.
>>>>>>> I dont see that as too big a deal either though, and again better done
>>>>>>> now than later.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Robbie
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 21 May 2015 at 22:42, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I need some help with the discussion I'm having at:
>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-9543
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you go to the artemis github mirror, you will see: mirrored from
>>>>>>>> git://git.apache.org/activemq-6.git
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It happens that per what I heard from Infra, the only way to do that
>>>>>>>> would be to recreate the repo. Meaning the Pull Request IDs would
>>>>>>>> restart, meaning we would lost any previous discussions we had on
>>>>>>>> github.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Although I'm not sure that's really a big deal, since these
>>>>>>>> discussions are all backed up at the dev list (the dev list has been
>>>>>>>> hearing the PR comments).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So, is there anyone against recreating the repo?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I asked Infra to wait until tomorrow.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Clebert Suconic
>>>>>> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
>>>>>> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Clebert Suconic
>>>> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
>>>> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
>
--
Clebert Suconic
http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
Re: [DISCUSSION] Renaming github mirror
Posted by Mark Frazier <mm...@me.com>.
Robbie, I’m still rather new to Apache and the open source community, so I’m a little confused.
When you say “Infra”, what exactly are you referring to? Is this a part of the Apache team?
Thanks
> On May 22, 2015, at 7:52 AM, Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Infra have updated the 3 repos/mirrors so they now say ActiveMQ Artemis.
>
> Robbie
>
> On 22 May 2015 at 09:20, Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The GitHub mirror has been recreated, and now correctly says it is
>> mirroring from the git://git.apache.org/activemq-artemis.git asf
>> mirror.
>>
>> It does however still have a description that it is a "Mirror of
>> Apache ActiveMQ 6". That is presumably because http://git.apache.org
>> still shows a description of "Apache ActiveMQ 6" against its mirror,
>> which in turn is presumably because the canonical repo at
>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=activemq-artemis.git does
>> too.
>>
>> I would hope infra can update the descriptions without recreating the
>> mirrors again, I'll ask and see.
>>
>> On 22 May 2015 at 01:16, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> too late :)
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:53 PM, Robbie Gemmell
>>> <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Err, I'd maybe hold up until tomorrow and give other folks a chance to
>>>> chime in, the below was only one persons opinion hehe.
>>>>
>>>> When I say 'now' vs 'later' I just meant the immediate term verus
>>>> months from now. I dont think its that big a deal that it has to
>>>> happen *right now* :)
>>>>
>>>> Robbie
>>>>
>>>> On 22 May 2015 at 00:30, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Ok, I won't even wait for other people's feedback... I will just go
>>>>> ahead and ask them to do it. Better now than later.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:03 PM, Robbie Gemmell
>>>>> <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> As the JIRA project has just been renamed today and no release has
>>>>>> occurred yet, I think now would probably be the best time to ever
>>>>>> recreate the mirror.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I dont think the pull requests numbers beginning again is that big an
>>>>>> issue. The comments are available on the dev list as you said, and
>>>>>> also any JIRAs the PR referenced, plus the commits made will remain
>>>>>> for inspection. There will obviously be some overlap with the old
>>>>>> numbers, but I dont think that should be too confusing as the dates
>>>>>> will make it fairly easy to tell whether it is a current reference or
>>>>>> an old one, plus any JIRA references will further help distinguish
>>>>>> them (given the old PR commits would refer to the old ACTIVEMQ6 JIRA
>>>>>> key, rather than the new ARTEMIS key).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One other issue to note is that I believe forks of the current GitHub
>>>>>> mirror will be re-parented against one of the remaining fork, so
>>>>>> people might need to recreate their forks against the main repo again.
>>>>>> I dont see that as too big a deal either though, and again better done
>>>>>> now than later.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Robbie
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 21 May 2015 at 22:42, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> I need some help with the discussion I'm having at:
>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-9543
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you go to the artemis github mirror, you will see: mirrored from
>>>>>>> git://git.apache.org/activemq-6.git
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It happens that per what I heard from Infra, the only way to do that
>>>>>>> would be to recreate the repo. Meaning the Pull Request IDs would
>>>>>>> restart, meaning we would lost any previous discussions we had on
>>>>>>> github.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Although I'm not sure that's really a big deal, since these
>>>>>>> discussions are all backed up at the dev list (the dev list has been
>>>>>>> hearing the PR comments).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So, is there anyone against recreating the repo?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I asked Infra to wait until tomorrow.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Clebert Suconic
>>>>> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
>>>>> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Clebert Suconic
>>> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
>>> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
Re: [DISCUSSION] Renaming github mirror
Posted by Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com>.
Infra have updated the 3 repos/mirrors so they now say ActiveMQ Artemis.
Robbie
On 22 May 2015 at 09:20, Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The GitHub mirror has been recreated, and now correctly says it is
> mirroring from the git://git.apache.org/activemq-artemis.git asf
> mirror.
>
> It does however still have a description that it is a "Mirror of
> Apache ActiveMQ 6". That is presumably because http://git.apache.org
> still shows a description of "Apache ActiveMQ 6" against its mirror,
> which in turn is presumably because the canonical repo at
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=activemq-artemis.git does
> too.
>
> I would hope infra can update the descriptions without recreating the
> mirrors again, I'll ask and see.
>
> On 22 May 2015 at 01:16, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> too late :)
>>
>> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:53 PM, Robbie Gemmell
>> <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Err, I'd maybe hold up until tomorrow and give other folks a chance to
>>> chime in, the below was only one persons opinion hehe.
>>>
>>> When I say 'now' vs 'later' I just meant the immediate term verus
>>> months from now. I dont think its that big a deal that it has to
>>> happen *right now* :)
>>>
>>> Robbie
>>>
>>> On 22 May 2015 at 00:30, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Ok, I won't even wait for other people's feedback... I will just go
>>>> ahead and ask them to do it. Better now than later.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:03 PM, Robbie Gemmell
>>>> <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> As the JIRA project has just been renamed today and no release has
>>>>> occurred yet, I think now would probably be the best time to ever
>>>>> recreate the mirror.
>>>>>
>>>>> I dont think the pull requests numbers beginning again is that big an
>>>>> issue. The comments are available on the dev list as you said, and
>>>>> also any JIRAs the PR referenced, plus the commits made will remain
>>>>> for inspection. There will obviously be some overlap with the old
>>>>> numbers, but I dont think that should be too confusing as the dates
>>>>> will make it fairly easy to tell whether it is a current reference or
>>>>> an old one, plus any JIRA references will further help distinguish
>>>>> them (given the old PR commits would refer to the old ACTIVEMQ6 JIRA
>>>>> key, rather than the new ARTEMIS key).
>>>>>
>>>>> One other issue to note is that I believe forks of the current GitHub
>>>>> mirror will be re-parented against one of the remaining fork, so
>>>>> people might need to recreate their forks against the main repo again.
>>>>> I dont see that as too big a deal either though, and again better done
>>>>> now than later.
>>>>>
>>>>> Robbie
>>>>>
>>>>> On 21 May 2015 at 22:42, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> I need some help with the discussion I'm having at:
>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-9543
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you go to the artemis github mirror, you will see: mirrored from
>>>>>> git://git.apache.org/activemq-6.git
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It happens that per what I heard from Infra, the only way to do that
>>>>>> would be to recreate the repo. Meaning the Pull Request IDs would
>>>>>> restart, meaning we would lost any previous discussions we had on
>>>>>> github.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Although I'm not sure that's really a big deal, since these
>>>>>> discussions are all backed up at the dev list (the dev list has been
>>>>>> hearing the PR comments).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, is there anyone against recreating the repo?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I asked Infra to wait until tomorrow.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Clebert Suconic
>>>> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
>>>> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Clebert Suconic
>> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
>> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
Re: [DISCUSSION] Renaming github mirror
Posted by Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com>.
The GitHub mirror has been recreated, and now correctly says it is
mirroring from the git://git.apache.org/activemq-artemis.git asf
mirror.
It does however still have a description that it is a "Mirror of
Apache ActiveMQ 6". That is presumably because http://git.apache.org
still shows a description of "Apache ActiveMQ 6" against its mirror,
which in turn is presumably because the canonical repo at
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=activemq-artemis.git does
too.
I would hope infra can update the descriptions without recreating the
mirrors again, I'll ask and see.
On 22 May 2015 at 01:16, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> too late :)
>
> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:53 PM, Robbie Gemmell
> <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Err, I'd maybe hold up until tomorrow and give other folks a chance to
>> chime in, the below was only one persons opinion hehe.
>>
>> When I say 'now' vs 'later' I just meant the immediate term verus
>> months from now. I dont think its that big a deal that it has to
>> happen *right now* :)
>>
>> Robbie
>>
>> On 22 May 2015 at 00:30, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Ok, I won't even wait for other people's feedback... I will just go
>>> ahead and ask them to do it. Better now than later.
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:03 PM, Robbie Gemmell
>>> <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> As the JIRA project has just been renamed today and no release has
>>>> occurred yet, I think now would probably be the best time to ever
>>>> recreate the mirror.
>>>>
>>>> I dont think the pull requests numbers beginning again is that big an
>>>> issue. The comments are available on the dev list as you said, and
>>>> also any JIRAs the PR referenced, plus the commits made will remain
>>>> for inspection. There will obviously be some overlap with the old
>>>> numbers, but I dont think that should be too confusing as the dates
>>>> will make it fairly easy to tell whether it is a current reference or
>>>> an old one, plus any JIRA references will further help distinguish
>>>> them (given the old PR commits would refer to the old ACTIVEMQ6 JIRA
>>>> key, rather than the new ARTEMIS key).
>>>>
>>>> One other issue to note is that I believe forks of the current GitHub
>>>> mirror will be re-parented against one of the remaining fork, so
>>>> people might need to recreate their forks against the main repo again.
>>>> I dont see that as too big a deal either though, and again better done
>>>> now than later.
>>>>
>>>> Robbie
>>>>
>>>> On 21 May 2015 at 22:42, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> I need some help with the discussion I'm having at:
>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-9543
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> If you go to the artemis github mirror, you will see: mirrored from
>>>>> git://git.apache.org/activemq-6.git
>>>>>
>>>>> https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It happens that per what I heard from Infra, the only way to do that
>>>>> would be to recreate the repo. Meaning the Pull Request IDs would
>>>>> restart, meaning we would lost any previous discussions we had on
>>>>> github.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Although I'm not sure that's really a big deal, since these
>>>>> discussions are all backed up at the dev list (the dev list has been
>>>>> hearing the PR comments).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> So, is there anyone against recreating the repo?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I asked Infra to wait until tomorrow.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Clebert Suconic
>>> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
>>> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
>
>
>
> --
> Clebert Suconic
> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
Re: [DISCUSSION] Renaming github mirror
Posted by Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com>.
too late :)
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:53 PM, Robbie Gemmell
<ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Err, I'd maybe hold up until tomorrow and give other folks a chance to
> chime in, the below was only one persons opinion hehe.
>
> When I say 'now' vs 'later' I just meant the immediate term verus
> months from now. I dont think its that big a deal that it has to
> happen *right now* :)
>
> Robbie
>
> On 22 May 2015 at 00:30, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Ok, I won't even wait for other people's feedback... I will just go
>> ahead and ask them to do it. Better now than later.
>>
>> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:03 PM, Robbie Gemmell
>> <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> As the JIRA project has just been renamed today and no release has
>>> occurred yet, I think now would probably be the best time to ever
>>> recreate the mirror.
>>>
>>> I dont think the pull requests numbers beginning again is that big an
>>> issue. The comments are available on the dev list as you said, and
>>> also any JIRAs the PR referenced, plus the commits made will remain
>>> for inspection. There will obviously be some overlap with the old
>>> numbers, but I dont think that should be too confusing as the dates
>>> will make it fairly easy to tell whether it is a current reference or
>>> an old one, plus any JIRA references will further help distinguish
>>> them (given the old PR commits would refer to the old ACTIVEMQ6 JIRA
>>> key, rather than the new ARTEMIS key).
>>>
>>> One other issue to note is that I believe forks of the current GitHub
>>> mirror will be re-parented against one of the remaining fork, so
>>> people might need to recreate their forks against the main repo again.
>>> I dont see that as too big a deal either though, and again better done
>>> now than later.
>>>
>>> Robbie
>>>
>>> On 21 May 2015 at 22:42, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I need some help with the discussion I'm having at:
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-9543
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you go to the artemis github mirror, you will see: mirrored from
>>>> git://git.apache.org/activemq-6.git
>>>>
>>>> https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It happens that per what I heard from Infra, the only way to do that
>>>> would be to recreate the repo. Meaning the Pull Request IDs would
>>>> restart, meaning we would lost any previous discussions we had on
>>>> github.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Although I'm not sure that's really a big deal, since these
>>>> discussions are all backed up at the dev list (the dev list has been
>>>> hearing the PR comments).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> So, is there anyone against recreating the repo?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I asked Infra to wait until tomorrow.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Clebert Suconic
>> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
>> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
--
Clebert Suconic
http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
Re: [DISCUSSION] Renaming github mirror
Posted by Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com>.
Err, I'd maybe hold up until tomorrow and give other folks a chance to
chime in, the below was only one persons opinion hehe.
When I say 'now' vs 'later' I just meant the immediate term verus
months from now. I dont think its that big a deal that it has to
happen *right now* :)
Robbie
On 22 May 2015 at 00:30, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ok, I won't even wait for other people's feedback... I will just go
> ahead and ask them to do it. Better now than later.
>
> On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:03 PM, Robbie Gemmell
> <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> As the JIRA project has just been renamed today and no release has
>> occurred yet, I think now would probably be the best time to ever
>> recreate the mirror.
>>
>> I dont think the pull requests numbers beginning again is that big an
>> issue. The comments are available on the dev list as you said, and
>> also any JIRAs the PR referenced, plus the commits made will remain
>> for inspection. There will obviously be some overlap with the old
>> numbers, but I dont think that should be too confusing as the dates
>> will make it fairly easy to tell whether it is a current reference or
>> an old one, plus any JIRA references will further help distinguish
>> them (given the old PR commits would refer to the old ACTIVEMQ6 JIRA
>> key, rather than the new ARTEMIS key).
>>
>> One other issue to note is that I believe forks of the current GitHub
>> mirror will be re-parented against one of the remaining fork, so
>> people might need to recreate their forks against the main repo again.
>> I dont see that as too big a deal either though, and again better done
>> now than later.
>>
>> Robbie
>>
>> On 21 May 2015 at 22:42, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I need some help with the discussion I'm having at:
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-9543
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> If you go to the artemis github mirror, you will see: mirrored from
>>> git://git.apache.org/activemq-6.git
>>>
>>> https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It happens that per what I heard from Infra, the only way to do that
>>> would be to recreate the repo. Meaning the Pull Request IDs would
>>> restart, meaning we would lost any previous discussions we had on
>>> github.
>>>
>>>
>>> Although I'm not sure that's really a big deal, since these
>>> discussions are all backed up at the dev list (the dev list has been
>>> hearing the PR comments).
>>>
>>>
>>> So, is there anyone against recreating the repo?
>>>
>>>
>>> I asked Infra to wait until tomorrow.
>
>
>
> --
> Clebert Suconic
> http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
Re: [DISCUSSION] Renaming github mirror
Posted by Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com>.
Ok, I won't even wait for other people's feedback... I will just go
ahead and ask them to do it. Better now than later.
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 7:03 PM, Robbie Gemmell
<ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> As the JIRA project has just been renamed today and no release has
> occurred yet, I think now would probably be the best time to ever
> recreate the mirror.
>
> I dont think the pull requests numbers beginning again is that big an
> issue. The comments are available on the dev list as you said, and
> also any JIRAs the PR referenced, plus the commits made will remain
> for inspection. There will obviously be some overlap with the old
> numbers, but I dont think that should be too confusing as the dates
> will make it fairly easy to tell whether it is a current reference or
> an old one, plus any JIRA references will further help distinguish
> them (given the old PR commits would refer to the old ACTIVEMQ6 JIRA
> key, rather than the new ARTEMIS key).
>
> One other issue to note is that I believe forks of the current GitHub
> mirror will be re-parented against one of the remaining fork, so
> people might need to recreate their forks against the main repo again.
> I dont see that as too big a deal either though, and again better done
> now than later.
>
> Robbie
>
> On 21 May 2015 at 22:42, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I need some help with the discussion I'm having at:
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-9543
>>
>>
>>
>> If you go to the artemis github mirror, you will see: mirrored from
>> git://git.apache.org/activemq-6.git
>>
>> https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis
>>
>>
>>
>> It happens that per what I heard from Infra, the only way to do that
>> would be to recreate the repo. Meaning the Pull Request IDs would
>> restart, meaning we would lost any previous discussions we had on
>> github.
>>
>>
>> Although I'm not sure that's really a big deal, since these
>> discussions are all backed up at the dev list (the dev list has been
>> hearing the PR comments).
>>
>>
>> So, is there anyone against recreating the repo?
>>
>>
>> I asked Infra to wait until tomorrow.
--
Clebert Suconic
http://community.jboss.org/people/clebert.suconic@jboss.com
http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
Re: [DISCUSSION] Renaming github mirror
Posted by Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com>.
As the JIRA project has just been renamed today and no release has
occurred yet, I think now would probably be the best time to ever
recreate the mirror.
I dont think the pull requests numbers beginning again is that big an
issue. The comments are available on the dev list as you said, and
also any JIRAs the PR referenced, plus the commits made will remain
for inspection. There will obviously be some overlap with the old
numbers, but I dont think that should be too confusing as the dates
will make it fairly easy to tell whether it is a current reference or
an old one, plus any JIRA references will further help distinguish
them (given the old PR commits would refer to the old ACTIVEMQ6 JIRA
key, rather than the new ARTEMIS key).
One other issue to note is that I believe forks of the current GitHub
mirror will be re-parented against one of the remaining fork, so
people might need to recreate their forks against the main repo again.
I dont see that as too big a deal either though, and again better done
now than later.
Robbie
On 21 May 2015 at 22:42, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I need some help with the discussion I'm having at:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-9543
>
>
>
> If you go to the artemis github mirror, you will see: mirrored from
> git://git.apache.org/activemq-6.git
>
> https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis
>
>
>
> It happens that per what I heard from Infra, the only way to do that
> would be to recreate the repo. Meaning the Pull Request IDs would
> restart, meaning we would lost any previous discussions we had on
> github.
>
>
> Although I'm not sure that's really a big deal, since these
> discussions are all backed up at the dev list (the dev list has been
> hearing the PR comments).
>
>
> So, is there anyone against recreating the repo?
>
>
> I asked Infra to wait until tomorrow.