You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@activemq.apache.org by Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com> on 2021/04/01 08:10:20 UTC
Re: [DISCUSS] Renaming master as main
Only 2 PRs in one repo closed unexpectedly, all the rest remained open
as expected (including newer and older PRs in the same repo; it's not
clear why those 2 were different).
It is easy to spot the PRs affected if it happens and react to it as
needed, and would happen similarly with the other approach but
affecting all PRs, so I wouldnt especially delay things due to it
personally (and note Infra are backlogged, so you will likely need to
wait a bit already). Though of course merging anything that can be
first wouldnt be a bad thing.
On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 18:11, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I was just waiting the outcome from you before I went ahead with
> ActiveMQ changes..
>
>
> @all should we merge as many Pull Requests we would like and some
> cleanup before we go ahead with the change? since they are going to be
> closed apparently?
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 12:50 PM Robbie Gemmell
> <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Infra did a test change on a single repo last week and all the
> > remaining repos today, so we have now renamed all the Qpid repository
> > branches from master to main using GitHub.
> >
> > It was straightforward and as expected for the most part, though there
> > were a couple of slight oddities:
> > - A couple of PRs did close unexpectedly saying master was deleted,
> > but the rest remained open and were rebased onto main as expected.
> > It's easy to tell if it happens.
> > - A variable number of commits per repo (some none, mostly only a few,
> > but 40 in one case) caused some 'replay'-like behaviour without clear
> > reason, provoking JIRA commit comment updates and related mails as if
> > they had just been pushed afresh.
> >
> > In short though these oddities were no big deal and the overall
> > outcome is nicer than the new-branch + delete-master approach. I'd
> > suggest asking to do it the same way.
> >
> > The related infra JIRA for Qpid was
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21589
> >
> > Robbie
> >
> > On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 at 20:21, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Using the GitHub to rename would be great as any PRs will probably be
> > > included.
> > >
> > > Thanks Rob.
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 4:08 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Nice ! Thanks for the update !
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > > JB
> > > >
> > > > > Le 16 mars 2021 à 19:08, Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com> a
> > > > écrit :
> > > > >
> > > > > I was originally going to begin the rename process for Qpid tomorrow,
> > > > > but in the past week I have either done or been on the receiving end
> > > > > of some GitHub-based renames elsewhere which gave a nicer end result
> > > > > than pushing a new branch and updating the default would.
> > > > >
> > > > > Knowing that it is an option to push to the Apache GitHub repos I had
> > > > > a chat with Infra about whether it might actually be possible for them
> > > > > to use the GitHub renaming tooling for this, as its just a nicer end
> > > > > state for everyone. Infra said it isnt something they have done before
> > > > > but would look into it, and could possibly try it out on the Qpid
> > > > > repos.
> > > > >
> > > > > You might want to hold off on the ActiveMQ repo changes a little to
> > > > > see what the outcome of that is.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 at 15:34, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Thanks a lot, I have everything I need now
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I plan to work on this next week.. I will follow up with progress as I
> > > > >> go over this thread.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 6:24 AM Robbie Gemmell <
> > > > robbie.gemmell@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Yep, thats the only config we have for the website auto build, which
> > > > >>> is a standard build. Essentially we just enable it and tell it which
> > > > >>> branch to build changes from (the one matching whoami) and then the
> > > > >>> target branch to commit and push any output updates to, where they are
> > > > >>> then picked up from for the web servers.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> The build itself occurs on a Builtbot CI instance at
> > > > >>> https://ci2.apache.org/#/builders/7. A mail is sent on each build to
> > > > >>> commits@, e.g the latest one is:
> > > > >>>
> > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rc14442fcfba8395bec5207f2c43b8dbde068f369fabe50de039509fc%40%3Ccommits.activemq.apache.org%3E
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> On Tue, 9 Mar 2021 at 22:46, Justin Bertram <jb...@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> The website actually uses Jekyll. The branch it uses is controlled
> > > > via the
> > > > >>>> .asf.yaml file [1]. More details about this are here [2].
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Justin
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/activemq-website/blob/master/.asf.yaml
> > > > >>>> [2]
> > > > >>>>
> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INFRA/git+-+.asf.yaml+features#Git.asf.yamlfeatures-JekyllCMS
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 4:42 PM Clebert Suconic <
> > > > clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
> > > > >>>> wrote:
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>> I see the website is the pelican system.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> I'm not sure how the AMQ5 is configured on Jenkins... that's the
> > > > only thing
> > > > >>>>> I'm lost now.
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>> On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 4:31 PM Clebert Suconic <
> > > > clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
> > > > >>>>> wrote:
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> That's right.. I will do it for all the Branches...
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> At this point now I'm looking to what I would need to change on
> > > > ci-builds
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> I'm looking on ci-builds for things we would need to change..
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> however I don't understand how ActiveMQ5 is configured here:
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/ActiveMQ/job/ActiveMQ/
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> I could find the simple configuration on artemis, but AMQ5 is using
> > > > >>>>>> some fancy configuration that I don't know where it's taking it
> > > > from.
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> @Jb or anyone can you give me some pointers here? I'm really curious
> > > > >>>>>> now.. (I know you could say you would change it. .but at this point
> > > > >>>>>> I'm trying to understand what is going on :) )
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> Also: where is the build for the website? I can't find it on
> > > > >>>>>> ci-builds.apache.org
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 3:10 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofre <
> > > > jb@nanthrax.net>
> > > > >>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>> That’s my guess as well ;)
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>> Le 9 mars 2021 à 08:57, michael.andre.pearce <
> > > > >>>>>> michael.andre.pearce@me.com.INVALID> a écrit :
> > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>> I assume the plan is to cover all repos, not just artemis.Sent
> > > > from
> > > > >>>>> my
> > > > >>>>>> Galaxy
> > > > >>>>>>>> -------- Original message --------From: Clebert Suconic <
> > > > >>>>>> clebert.suconic@gmail.com> Date: 06/03/2021 14:33 (GMT+00:00) To:
> > > > >>>>>> dev@activemq.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Renaming master as
> > > > main
> > > > >>>>> We
> > > > >>>>>> will have to create the main branch on gitbox and Infra will make
> > > > >>>>> theswitch
> > > > >>>>>> on GitHub.On Sat, Mar 6, 2021 at 12:15 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofre <
> > > > >>>>>> jb@nanthrax.net>wrote:> Correct, we should focus on gitbox (that’s
> > > > why
> > > > >>>>>> better to ask to infra).>> Regards> JB>> > Le 5 mars 2021 à 23:16,
> > > > Justin
> > > > >>>>>> Bertram <jb...@apache.org> a écrit :> >> > Aren't the Apache
> > > > GitHub
> > > > >>>>>> repos just mirrors of the official versions on> > Apache's
> > > > >>>>> infrastructure?
> > > > >>>>>> I know when we merge PRs we push to> > https://gitbox.apache.org/.
> > > > If
> > > > >>>>> the
> > > > >>>>>> GitHub repo is just a mirror> wouldn't we> > have to rename the
> > > > branch on
> > > > >>>>>> Apache first? I'm not real clear on all the> > details of how the
> > > > >>>>>> integration works so maybe that's wrong.> >> >> > Justin> >> > On
> > > > Fri,
> > > > >>>>> Mar
> > > > >>>>>> 5, 2021 at 4:06 PM Matt Pavlovich <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:> >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>>>>> GitHub solved the PR move if the rename is done via their UI:> >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>>>>> https://github.com/github/renaming <
> > > > https://github.com/github/renaming>>
> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> -Matt> >>> >>> On Mar 5, 2021, at 2:54 PM, Clebert Suconic <
> > > > >>>>>> clebert.suconic@gmail.com> >> >> wrote:> >>>> >>> Good point.>
> > > > >>>> >>>
> > > > >>>>>> I’m not sure what to do with pending PRs> >>>> >>> In artemis you
> > > > could
> > > > >>>>> use
> > > > >>>>>> the scripts and they would work.> >>>> >>> On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at
> > > > 2:54 PM
> > > > >>>>>> Matt Pavlovich <ma...@gmail.com>> >> wrote:> >>>> >>>> +1 no
> > > > problem.
> > > > >>>>>> Please to cover the CI jobs, so we don’t lose those.> >>>> Thanks!>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 5, 2021, at 11:24 AM, Clebert Suconic <> >>
> > > > >>>>>> clebert.suconic@gmail.com>> >>>> wrote:> >>>>>> >>>>> I would like
> > > > to
> > > > >>>>>> propose to rename all of our git branches as main on> >>>>> all of
> > > > our
> > > > >>>>>> branches. This would be a very first easy step to take on> >>>>>
> > > > renaming
> > > > >>>>>> offensive language from our codebases.> >>>>>> >>>>> We could allow
> > > > some
> > > > >>>>>> time before we do that, say 7 days after we> decide> >>>>> to take
> > > > the
> > > > >>>>>> move.> >>>>>> >>>>> Anyone sees a problem with that?> >>>>>> >>>>>
> > > > if
> > > > >>>>>> anyone has internal forks depending on master (say if you have a>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> downstream branch of ActiveMQ), you will likely have to update your>
> > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> internal git repos and scripts.> >>>>>> >>>>> We could keep the
> > > > master
> > > > >>>>> for
> > > > >>>>>> some time without being updated, until> we> >>>>> remove it later.>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>>>>> --> >>> Clebert Suconic> >>> >>>> --Clebert Suconic
> > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>> --
> > > > >>>>>> Clebert Suconic
> > > > >>>>>>
> > > > >>>>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> --
> > > > >> Clebert Suconic
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > Clebert Suconic
>
>
>
> --
> Clebert Suconic
Re: [DISCUSS] Renaming master as main
Posted by Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com>.
For anyone that hasnt already updated their local repository clones
after the branch renames, you can either do a fresh clone, or update
the settings on your existing clone.
If you decide to update an existing repo clone, these are GitHub's
recommended steps for handling a branch rename:
git branch -m master main
git fetch origin
git branch -u origin/main main
git remote set-head origin -a
(Where 'origin' is the git remote name you have given to the repo,
update that as appropriate for your naming choice if different)
I tend to follow this myself with a further command of:
git remote prune --dry-run origin (and then run it again without
--dry-run if happy with the output)
This additionally does a prune of stale references, which will remove
the remaining reference(s) to master, and any other references to
things that no longer exist in the remote repo. Do a dry run to see a
preview of what it would do, and then repeat without the --dry-run to
actually make the change.
Note that you will also have to do the rename in your own pre-existing
GitHub forks if you want them to align. GitHub notifies you of the
upstream repo change in its UI when you load your fork repo page, and
directs you to the relevant space in settings to do a similar rename
(essentially go to
https://github.com/<username>/<repo-name>/settings/branches and then
click the pencil icon to rename the default branch, then type in
main).
Robbie
On Mon, 5 Apr 2021 at 22:11, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Drew Foulks from Apache Infra will perform the rename on this Friday,
> April 9th, 20 UTC.
>
> if everybody could please refrain from committing or merging PRs at
> the same time. on any of our repositories?
>
>
> Follow the discussion at:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21495
>
>
> I will try my best updating all the CIs.. but I will definitely need
> help to make sure we won't miss anything.
>
>
> Cheers everybody.
>
> On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 3:18 PM Christopher Shannon
> <ch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > +1 from me to go ahead. Most projects seem to be moving to the model of
> > using "main" as the default branch so I think we should do the same.
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 2:45 PM Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > That means we can go ahead with that then...
> > >
> > > if anyone have any objections, let me know..
> > >
> > >
> > > I will ask in the ticket for when that would be done.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 4:10 AM Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Only 2 PRs in one repo closed unexpectedly, all the rest remained open
> > > > as expected (including newer and older PRs in the same repo; it's not
> > > > clear why those 2 were different).
> > > >
> > > > It is easy to spot the PRs affected if it happens and react to it as
> > > > needed, and would happen similarly with the other approach but
> > > > affecting all PRs, so I wouldnt especially delay things due to it
> > > > personally (and note Infra are backlogged, so you will likely need to
> > > > wait a bit already). Though of course merging anything that can be
> > > > first wouldnt be a bad thing.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 18:11, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I was just waiting the outcome from you before I went ahead with
> > > > > ActiveMQ changes..
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > @all should we merge as many Pull Requests we would like and some
> > > > > cleanup before we go ahead with the change? since they are going to be
> > > > > closed apparently?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 12:50 PM Robbie Gemmell
> > > > > <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Infra did a test change on a single repo last week and all the
> > > > > > remaining repos today, so we have now renamed all the Qpid repository
> > > > > > branches from master to main using GitHub.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It was straightforward and as expected for the most part, though
> > > there
> > > > > > were a couple of slight oddities:
> > > > > > - A couple of PRs did close unexpectedly saying master was deleted,
> > > > > > but the rest remained open and were rebased onto main as expected.
> > > > > > It's easy to tell if it happens.
> > > > > > - A variable number of commits per repo (some none, mostly only a
> > > few,
> > > > > > but 40 in one case) caused some 'replay'-like behaviour without clear
> > > > > > reason, provoking JIRA commit comment updates and related mails as if
> > > > > > they had just been pushed afresh.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In short though these oddities were no big deal and the overall
> > > > > > outcome is nicer than the new-branch + delete-master approach. I'd
> > > > > > suggest asking to do it the same way.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The related infra JIRA for Qpid was
> > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21589
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Robbie
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 at 20:21, Clebert Suconic <
> > > clebert.suconic@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Using the GitHub to rename would be great as any PRs will probably
> > > be
> > > > > > > included.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks Rob.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 4:08 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofre <
> > > jb@nanthrax.net>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Nice ! Thanks for the update !
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > > JB
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Le 16 mars 2021 à 19:08, Robbie Gemmell <
> > > robbie.gemmell@gmail.com> a
> > > > > > > > écrit :
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I was originally going to begin the rename process for Qpid
> > > tomorrow,
> > > > > > > > > but in the past week I have either done or been on the
> > > receiving end
> > > > > > > > > of some GitHub-based renames elsewhere which gave a nicer end
> > > result
> > > > > > > > > than pushing a new branch and updating the default would.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Knowing that it is an option to push to the Apache GitHub
> > > repos I had
> > > > > > > > > a chat with Infra about whether it might actually be possible
> > > for them
> > > > > > > > > to use the GitHub renaming tooling for this, as its just a
> > > nicer end
> > > > > > > > > state for everyone. Infra said it isnt something they have
> > > done before
> > > > > > > > > but would look into it, and could possibly try it out on the
> > > Qpid
> > > > > > > > > repos.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > You might want to hold off on the ActiveMQ repo changes a
> > > little to
> > > > > > > > > see what the outcome of that is.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 at 15:34, Clebert Suconic <
> > > clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> Thanks a lot, I have everything I need now
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> I plan to work on this next week.. I will follow up with
> > > progress as I
> > > > > > > > >> go over this thread.
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 6:24 AM Robbie Gemmell <
> > > > > > > > robbie.gemmell@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> Yep, thats the only config we have for the website auto
> > > build, which
> > > > > > > > >>> is a standard build. Essentially we just enable it and tell
> > > it which
> > > > > > > > >>> branch to build changes from (the one matching whoami) and
> > > then the
> > > > > > > > >>> target branch to commit and push any output updates to,
> > > where they are
> > > > > > > > >>> then picked up from for the web servers.
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> The build itself occurs on a Builtbot CI instance at
> > > > > > > > >>> https://ci2.apache.org/#/builders/7. A mail is sent on each
> > > build to
> > > > > > > > >>> commits@, e.g the latest one is:
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >
> > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rc14442fcfba8395bec5207f2c43b8dbde068f369fabe50de039509fc%40%3Ccommits.activemq.apache.org%3E
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> On Tue, 9 Mar 2021 at 22:46, Justin Bertram <
> > > jbertram@apache.org>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>> The website actually uses Jekyll. The branch it uses is
> > > controlled
> > > > > > > > via the
> > > > > > > > >>>> .asf.yaml file [1]. More details about this are here [2].
> > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>> Justin
> > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>> [1]
> > > https://github.com/apache/activemq-website/blob/master/.asf.yaml
> > > > > > > > >>>> [2]
> > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > >
> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INFRA/git+-+.asf.yaml+features#Git.asf.yamlfeatures-JekyllCMS
> > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>> On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 4:42 PM Clebert Suconic <
> > > > > > > > clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > >>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>> I see the website is the pelican system.
> > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>> I'm not sure how the AMQ5 is configured on Jenkins...
> > > that's the
> > > > > > > > only thing
> > > > > > > > >>>>> I'm lost now.
> > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>> On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 4:31 PM Clebert Suconic <
> > > > > > > > clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > >>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> That's right.. I will do it for all the Branches...
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> At this point now I'm looking to what I would need to
> > > change on
> > > > > > > > ci-builds
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> I'm looking on ci-builds for things we would need to
> > > change..
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> however I don't understand how ActiveMQ5 is configured
> > > here:
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/ActiveMQ/job/ActiveMQ/
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> I could find the simple configuration on artemis, but
> > > AMQ5 is using
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> some fancy configuration that I don't know where it's
> > > taking it
> > > > > > > > from.
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> @Jb or anyone can you give me some pointers here? I'm
> > > really curious
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> now.. (I know you could say you would change it. .but at
> > > this point
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> I'm trying to understand what is going on :) )
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> Also: where is the build for the website? I can't find it
> > > on
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> ci-builds.apache.org
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 3:10 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofre <
> > > > > > > > jb@nanthrax.net>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>> That’s my guess as well ;)
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> Le 9 mars 2021 à 08:57, michael.andre.pearce <
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> michael.andre.pearce@me.com.INVALID> a écrit :
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> I assume the plan is to cover all repos, not just
> > > artemis.Sent
> > > > > > > > from
> > > > > > > > >>>>> my
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> Galaxy
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> -------- Original message --------From: Clebert Suconic
> > > <
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> clebert.suconic@gmail.com> Date: 06/03/2021 14:33
> > > (GMT+00:00) To:
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> dev@activemq.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Renaming
> > > master as
> > > > > > > > main
> > > > > > > > >>>>> We
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> will have to create the main branch on gitbox and Infra
> > > will make
> > > > > > > > >>>>> theswitch
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> on GitHub.On Sat, Mar 6, 2021 at 12:15 AM Jean-Baptiste
> > > Onofre <
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> jb@nanthrax.net>wrote:> Correct, we should focus on
> > > gitbox (that’s
> > > > > > > > why
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> better to ask to infra).>> Regards> JB>> > Le 5 mars 2021
> > > à 23:16,
> > > > > > > > Justin
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> Bertram <jb...@apache.org> a écrit :> >> > Aren't the
> > > Apache
> > > > > > > > GitHub
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> repos just mirrors of the official versions on> > Apache's
> > > > > > > > >>>>> infrastructure?
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> I know when we merge PRs we push to> >
> > > https://gitbox.apache.org/.
> > > > > > > > If
> > > > > > > > >>>>> the
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> GitHub repo is just a mirror> wouldn't we> > have to
> > > rename the
> > > > > > > > branch on
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> Apache first? I'm not real clear on all the> > details of
> > > how the
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> integration works so maybe that's wrong.> >> >> > Justin>
> > > >> > On
> > > > > > > > Fri,
> > > > > > > > >>>>> Mar
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> 5, 2021 at 4:06 PM Matt Pavlovich <ma...@gmail.com>>
> > > wrote:> >>
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> GitHub solved the PR move if the rename is done via their
> > > UI:> >>>
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> https://github.com/github/renaming <
> > > > > > > > https://github.com/github/renaming>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> -Matt> >>> >>> On Mar 5, 2021, at 2:54 PM, Clebert
> > > Suconic <
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> clebert.suconic@gmail.com> >> >> wrote:> >>>> >>> Good
> > > point.>
> > > > > > > > >>>> >>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> I’m not sure what to do with pending PRs> >>>> >>> In
> > > artemis you
> > > > > > > > could
> > > > > > > > >>>>> use
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> the scripts and they would work.> >>>> >>> On Fri, Mar 5,
> > > 2021 at
> > > > > > > > 2:54 PM
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> Matt Pavlovich <ma...@gmail.com>> >> wrote:> >>>>
> > > >>>> +1 no
> > > > > > > > problem.
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> Please to cover the CI jobs, so we don’t lose those.>
> > > >>>> Thanks!>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 5, 2021, at 11:24 AM, Clebert Suconic <> >>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> clebert.suconic@gmail.com>> >>>> wrote:> >>>>>> >>>>> I
> > > would like
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> propose to rename all of our git branches as main on>
> > > >>>>> all of
> > > > > > > > our
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> branches. This would be a very first easy step to take
> > > on> >>>>>
> > > > > > > > renaming
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> offensive language from our codebases.> >>>>>> >>>>> We
> > > could allow
> > > > > > > > some
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> time before we do that, say 7 days after we> decide>
> > > >>>>> to take
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> move.> >>>>>> >>>>> Anyone sees a problem with that?>
> > > >>>>>> >>>>>
> > > > > > > > if
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> anyone has internal forks depending on master (say if you
> > > have a>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> downstream branch of ActiveMQ), you will likely have to
> > > update your>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> internal git repos and scripts.> >>>>>> >>>>> We could
> > > keep the
> > > > > > > > master
> > > > > > > > >>>>> for
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> some time without being updated, until> we> >>>>> remove
> > > it later.>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> --> >>> Clebert Suconic> >>> >>>> --Clebert Suconic
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> --
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> Clebert Suconic
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> --
> > > > > > > > >> Clebert Suconic
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Clebert Suconic
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Clebert Suconic
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Clebert Suconic
> > >
>
>
>
> --
> Clebert Suconic
Re: [DISCUSS] Renaming master as main
Posted by Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com>.
I renamed the "ActiveMQ-Artemis-Master-JDK8" job on Jenkins to be
simply "ActiveMQ-Artemis-JDK8":
https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/ActiveMQ/job/ActiveMQ-Artemis-JDK8/
On Mon, 5 Apr 2021 at 22:11, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Drew Foulks from Apache Infra will perform the rename on this Friday,
> April 9th, 20 UTC.
>
> if everybody could please refrain from committing or merging PRs at
> the same time. on any of our repositories?
>
>
> Follow the discussion at:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21495
>
>
> I will try my best updating all the CIs.. but I will definitely need
> help to make sure we won't miss anything.
>
>
> Cheers everybody.
>
> On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 3:18 PM Christopher Shannon
> <ch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > +1 from me to go ahead. Most projects seem to be moving to the model of
> > using "main" as the default branch so I think we should do the same.
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 2:45 PM Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > That means we can go ahead with that then...
> > >
> > > if anyone have any objections, let me know..
> > >
> > >
> > > I will ask in the ticket for when that would be done.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 4:10 AM Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Only 2 PRs in one repo closed unexpectedly, all the rest remained open
> > > > as expected (including newer and older PRs in the same repo; it's not
> > > > clear why those 2 were different).
> > > >
> > > > It is easy to spot the PRs affected if it happens and react to it as
> > > > needed, and would happen similarly with the other approach but
> > > > affecting all PRs, so I wouldnt especially delay things due to it
> > > > personally (and note Infra are backlogged, so you will likely need to
> > > > wait a bit already). Though of course merging anything that can be
> > > > first wouldnt be a bad thing.
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 18:11, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I was just waiting the outcome from you before I went ahead with
> > > > > ActiveMQ changes..
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > @all should we merge as many Pull Requests we would like and some
> > > > > cleanup before we go ahead with the change? since they are going to be
> > > > > closed apparently?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 12:50 PM Robbie Gemmell
> > > > > <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Infra did a test change on a single repo last week and all the
> > > > > > remaining repos today, so we have now renamed all the Qpid repository
> > > > > > branches from master to main using GitHub.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It was straightforward and as expected for the most part, though
> > > there
> > > > > > were a couple of slight oddities:
> > > > > > - A couple of PRs did close unexpectedly saying master was deleted,
> > > > > > but the rest remained open and were rebased onto main as expected.
> > > > > > It's easy to tell if it happens.
> > > > > > - A variable number of commits per repo (some none, mostly only a
> > > few,
> > > > > > but 40 in one case) caused some 'replay'-like behaviour without clear
> > > > > > reason, provoking JIRA commit comment updates and related mails as if
> > > > > > they had just been pushed afresh.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In short though these oddities were no big deal and the overall
> > > > > > outcome is nicer than the new-branch + delete-master approach. I'd
> > > > > > suggest asking to do it the same way.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The related infra JIRA for Qpid was
> > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21589
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Robbie
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 at 20:21, Clebert Suconic <
> > > clebert.suconic@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Using the GitHub to rename would be great as any PRs will probably
> > > be
> > > > > > > included.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks Rob.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 4:08 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofre <
> > > jb@nanthrax.net>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Nice ! Thanks for the update !
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > > JB
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Le 16 mars 2021 à 19:08, Robbie Gemmell <
> > > robbie.gemmell@gmail.com> a
> > > > > > > > écrit :
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I was originally going to begin the rename process for Qpid
> > > tomorrow,
> > > > > > > > > but in the past week I have either done or been on the
> > > receiving end
> > > > > > > > > of some GitHub-based renames elsewhere which gave a nicer end
> > > result
> > > > > > > > > than pushing a new branch and updating the default would.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Knowing that it is an option to push to the Apache GitHub
> > > repos I had
> > > > > > > > > a chat with Infra about whether it might actually be possible
> > > for them
> > > > > > > > > to use the GitHub renaming tooling for this, as its just a
> > > nicer end
> > > > > > > > > state for everyone. Infra said it isnt something they have
> > > done before
> > > > > > > > > but would look into it, and could possibly try it out on the
> > > Qpid
> > > > > > > > > repos.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > You might want to hold off on the ActiveMQ repo changes a
> > > little to
> > > > > > > > > see what the outcome of that is.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 at 15:34, Clebert Suconic <
> > > clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> Thanks a lot, I have everything I need now
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> I plan to work on this next week.. I will follow up with
> > > progress as I
> > > > > > > > >> go over this thread.
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 6:24 AM Robbie Gemmell <
> > > > > > > > robbie.gemmell@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> Yep, thats the only config we have for the website auto
> > > build, which
> > > > > > > > >>> is a standard build. Essentially we just enable it and tell
> > > it which
> > > > > > > > >>> branch to build changes from (the one matching whoami) and
> > > then the
> > > > > > > > >>> target branch to commit and push any output updates to,
> > > where they are
> > > > > > > > >>> then picked up from for the web servers.
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> The build itself occurs on a Builtbot CI instance at
> > > > > > > > >>> https://ci2.apache.org/#/builders/7. A mail is sent on each
> > > build to
> > > > > > > > >>> commits@, e.g the latest one is:
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >
> > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rc14442fcfba8395bec5207f2c43b8dbde068f369fabe50de039509fc%40%3Ccommits.activemq.apache.org%3E
> > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >>> On Tue, 9 Mar 2021 at 22:46, Justin Bertram <
> > > jbertram@apache.org>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>> The website actually uses Jekyll. The branch it uses is
> > > controlled
> > > > > > > > via the
> > > > > > > > >>>> .asf.yaml file [1]. More details about this are here [2].
> > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>> Justin
> > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>> [1]
> > > https://github.com/apache/activemq-website/blob/master/.asf.yaml
> > > > > > > > >>>> [2]
> > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > >
> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INFRA/git+-+.asf.yaml+features#Git.asf.yamlfeatures-JekyllCMS
> > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>> On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 4:42 PM Clebert Suconic <
> > > > > > > > clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > >>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>> I see the website is the pelican system.
> > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>> I'm not sure how the AMQ5 is configured on Jenkins...
> > > that's the
> > > > > > > > only thing
> > > > > > > > >>>>> I'm lost now.
> > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>> On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 4:31 PM Clebert Suconic <
> > > > > > > > clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > >>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> That's right.. I will do it for all the Branches...
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> At this point now I'm looking to what I would need to
> > > change on
> > > > > > > > ci-builds
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> I'm looking on ci-builds for things we would need to
> > > change..
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> however I don't understand how ActiveMQ5 is configured
> > > here:
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/ActiveMQ/job/ActiveMQ/
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> I could find the simple configuration on artemis, but
> > > AMQ5 is using
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> some fancy configuration that I don't know where it's
> > > taking it
> > > > > > > > from.
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> @Jb or anyone can you give me some pointers here? I'm
> > > really curious
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> now.. (I know you could say you would change it. .but at
> > > this point
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> I'm trying to understand what is going on :) )
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> Also: where is the build for the website? I can't find it
> > > on
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> ci-builds.apache.org
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 3:10 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofre <
> > > > > > > > jb@nanthrax.net>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>> That’s my guess as well ;)
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> Le 9 mars 2021 à 08:57, michael.andre.pearce <
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> michael.andre.pearce@me.com.INVALID> a écrit :
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> I assume the plan is to cover all repos, not just
> > > artemis.Sent
> > > > > > > > from
> > > > > > > > >>>>> my
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> Galaxy
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>> -------- Original message --------From: Clebert Suconic
> > > <
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> clebert.suconic@gmail.com> Date: 06/03/2021 14:33
> > > (GMT+00:00) To:
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> dev@activemq.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Renaming
> > > master as
> > > > > > > > main
> > > > > > > > >>>>> We
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> will have to create the main branch on gitbox and Infra
> > > will make
> > > > > > > > >>>>> theswitch
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> on GitHub.On Sat, Mar 6, 2021 at 12:15 AM Jean-Baptiste
> > > Onofre <
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> jb@nanthrax.net>wrote:> Correct, we should focus on
> > > gitbox (that’s
> > > > > > > > why
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> better to ask to infra).>> Regards> JB>> > Le 5 mars 2021
> > > à 23:16,
> > > > > > > > Justin
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> Bertram <jb...@apache.org> a écrit :> >> > Aren't the
> > > Apache
> > > > > > > > GitHub
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> repos just mirrors of the official versions on> > Apache's
> > > > > > > > >>>>> infrastructure?
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> I know when we merge PRs we push to> >
> > > https://gitbox.apache.org/.
> > > > > > > > If
> > > > > > > > >>>>> the
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> GitHub repo is just a mirror> wouldn't we> > have to
> > > rename the
> > > > > > > > branch on
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> Apache first? I'm not real clear on all the> > details of
> > > how the
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> integration works so maybe that's wrong.> >> >> > Justin>
> > > >> > On
> > > > > > > > Fri,
> > > > > > > > >>>>> Mar
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> 5, 2021 at 4:06 PM Matt Pavlovich <ma...@gmail.com>>
> > > wrote:> >>
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> GitHub solved the PR move if the rename is done via their
> > > UI:> >>>
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> https://github.com/github/renaming <
> > > > > > > > https://github.com/github/renaming>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> -Matt> >>> >>> On Mar 5, 2021, at 2:54 PM, Clebert
> > > Suconic <
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> clebert.suconic@gmail.com> >> >> wrote:> >>>> >>> Good
> > > point.>
> > > > > > > > >>>> >>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> I’m not sure what to do with pending PRs> >>>> >>> In
> > > artemis you
> > > > > > > > could
> > > > > > > > >>>>> use
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> the scripts and they would work.> >>>> >>> On Fri, Mar 5,
> > > 2021 at
> > > > > > > > 2:54 PM
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> Matt Pavlovich <ma...@gmail.com>> >> wrote:> >>>>
> > > >>>> +1 no
> > > > > > > > problem.
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> Please to cover the CI jobs, so we don’t lose those.>
> > > >>>> Thanks!>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 5, 2021, at 11:24 AM, Clebert Suconic <> >>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> clebert.suconic@gmail.com>> >>>> wrote:> >>>>>> >>>>> I
> > > would like
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> propose to rename all of our git branches as main on>
> > > >>>>> all of
> > > > > > > > our
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> branches. This would be a very first easy step to take
> > > on> >>>>>
> > > > > > > > renaming
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> offensive language from our codebases.> >>>>>> >>>>> We
> > > could allow
> > > > > > > > some
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> time before we do that, say 7 days after we> decide>
> > > >>>>> to take
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> move.> >>>>>> >>>>> Anyone sees a problem with that?>
> > > >>>>>> >>>>>
> > > > > > > > if
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> anyone has internal forks depending on master (say if you
> > > have a>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> downstream branch of ActiveMQ), you will likely have to
> > > update your>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> internal git repos and scripts.> >>>>>> >>>>> We could
> > > keep the
> > > > > > > > master
> > > > > > > > >>>>> for
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> some time without being updated, until> we> >>>>> remove
> > > it later.>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> --> >>> Clebert Suconic> >>> >>>> --Clebert Suconic
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> --
> > > > > > > > >>>>>> Clebert Suconic
> > > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> --
> > > > > > > > >> Clebert Suconic
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Clebert Suconic
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Clebert Suconic
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Clebert Suconic
> > >
>
>
>
> --
> Clebert Suconic
Re: [DISCUSS] Renaming master as main
Posted by Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com>.
Drew Foulks from Apache Infra will perform the rename on this Friday,
April 9th, 20 UTC.
if everybody could please refrain from committing or merging PRs at
the same time. on any of our repositories?
Follow the discussion at:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21495
I will try my best updating all the CIs.. but I will definitely need
help to make sure we won't miss anything.
Cheers everybody.
On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 3:18 PM Christopher Shannon
<ch...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> +1 from me to go ahead. Most projects seem to be moving to the model of
> using "main" as the default branch so I think we should do the same.
>
> On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 2:45 PM Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > That means we can go ahead with that then...
> >
> > if anyone have any objections, let me know..
> >
> >
> > I will ask in the ticket for when that would be done.
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 4:10 AM Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Only 2 PRs in one repo closed unexpectedly, all the rest remained open
> > > as expected (including newer and older PRs in the same repo; it's not
> > > clear why those 2 were different).
> > >
> > > It is easy to spot the PRs affected if it happens and react to it as
> > > needed, and would happen similarly with the other approach but
> > > affecting all PRs, so I wouldnt especially delay things due to it
> > > personally (and note Infra are backlogged, so you will likely need to
> > > wait a bit already). Though of course merging anything that can be
> > > first wouldnt be a bad thing.
> > >
> > > On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 18:11, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I was just waiting the outcome from you before I went ahead with
> > > > ActiveMQ changes..
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > @all should we merge as many Pull Requests we would like and some
> > > > cleanup before we go ahead with the change? since they are going to be
> > > > closed apparently?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 12:50 PM Robbie Gemmell
> > > > <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Infra did a test change on a single repo last week and all the
> > > > > remaining repos today, so we have now renamed all the Qpid repository
> > > > > branches from master to main using GitHub.
> > > > >
> > > > > It was straightforward and as expected for the most part, though
> > there
> > > > > were a couple of slight oddities:
> > > > > - A couple of PRs did close unexpectedly saying master was deleted,
> > > > > but the rest remained open and were rebased onto main as expected.
> > > > > It's easy to tell if it happens.
> > > > > - A variable number of commits per repo (some none, mostly only a
> > few,
> > > > > but 40 in one case) caused some 'replay'-like behaviour without clear
> > > > > reason, provoking JIRA commit comment updates and related mails as if
> > > > > they had just been pushed afresh.
> > > > >
> > > > > In short though these oddities were no big deal and the overall
> > > > > outcome is nicer than the new-branch + delete-master approach. I'd
> > > > > suggest asking to do it the same way.
> > > > >
> > > > > The related infra JIRA for Qpid was
> > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21589
> > > > >
> > > > > Robbie
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 at 20:21, Clebert Suconic <
> > clebert.suconic@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Using the GitHub to rename would be great as any PRs will probably
> > be
> > > > > > included.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks Rob.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 4:08 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofre <
> > jb@nanthrax.net>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Nice ! Thanks for the update !
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > > JB
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Le 16 mars 2021 à 19:08, Robbie Gemmell <
> > robbie.gemmell@gmail.com> a
> > > > > > > écrit :
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I was originally going to begin the rename process for Qpid
> > tomorrow,
> > > > > > > > but in the past week I have either done or been on the
> > receiving end
> > > > > > > > of some GitHub-based renames elsewhere which gave a nicer end
> > result
> > > > > > > > than pushing a new branch and updating the default would.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Knowing that it is an option to push to the Apache GitHub
> > repos I had
> > > > > > > > a chat with Infra about whether it might actually be possible
> > for them
> > > > > > > > to use the GitHub renaming tooling for this, as its just a
> > nicer end
> > > > > > > > state for everyone. Infra said it isnt something they have
> > done before
> > > > > > > > but would look into it, and could possibly try it out on the
> > Qpid
> > > > > > > > repos.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > You might want to hold off on the ActiveMQ repo changes a
> > little to
> > > > > > > > see what the outcome of that is.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 at 15:34, Clebert Suconic <
> > clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> Thanks a lot, I have everything I need now
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> I plan to work on this next week.. I will follow up with
> > progress as I
> > > > > > > >> go over this thread.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 6:24 AM Robbie Gemmell <
> > > > > > > robbie.gemmell@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>> Yep, thats the only config we have for the website auto
> > build, which
> > > > > > > >>> is a standard build. Essentially we just enable it and tell
> > it which
> > > > > > > >>> branch to build changes from (the one matching whoami) and
> > then the
> > > > > > > >>> target branch to commit and push any output updates to,
> > where they are
> > > > > > > >>> then picked up from for the web servers.
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>> The build itself occurs on a Builtbot CI instance at
> > > > > > > >>> https://ci2.apache.org/#/builders/7. A mail is sent on each
> > build to
> > > > > > > >>> commits@, e.g the latest one is:
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >
> > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rc14442fcfba8395bec5207f2c43b8dbde068f369fabe50de039509fc%40%3Ccommits.activemq.apache.org%3E
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>> On Tue, 9 Mar 2021 at 22:46, Justin Bertram <
> > jbertram@apache.org>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > >>>> The website actually uses Jekyll. The branch it uses is
> > controlled
> > > > > > > via the
> > > > > > > >>>> .asf.yaml file [1]. More details about this are here [2].
> > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > >>>> Justin
> > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > >>>> [1]
> > https://github.com/apache/activemq-website/blob/master/.asf.yaml
> > > > > > > >>>> [2]
> > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INFRA/git+-+.asf.yaml+features#Git.asf.yamlfeatures-JekyllCMS
> > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > >>>> On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 4:42 PM Clebert Suconic <
> > > > > > > clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > >>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>> I see the website is the pelican system.
> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>> I'm not sure how the AMQ5 is configured on Jenkins...
> > that's the
> > > > > > > only thing
> > > > > > > >>>>> I'm lost now.
> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>> On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 4:31 PM Clebert Suconic <
> > > > > > > clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > >>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> That's right.. I will do it for all the Branches...
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> At this point now I'm looking to what I would need to
> > change on
> > > > > > > ci-builds
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> I'm looking on ci-builds for things we would need to
> > change..
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> however I don't understand how ActiveMQ5 is configured
> > here:
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/ActiveMQ/job/ActiveMQ/
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> I could find the simple configuration on artemis, but
> > AMQ5 is using
> > > > > > > >>>>>> some fancy configuration that I don't know where it's
> > taking it
> > > > > > > from.
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> @Jb or anyone can you give me some pointers here? I'm
> > really curious
> > > > > > > >>>>>> now.. (I know you could say you would change it. .but at
> > this point
> > > > > > > >>>>>> I'm trying to understand what is going on :) )
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> Also: where is the build for the website? I can't find it
> > on
> > > > > > > >>>>>> ci-builds.apache.org
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 3:10 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofre <
> > > > > > > jb@nanthrax.net>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>>> That’s my guess as well ;)
> > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>>>> Le 9 mars 2021 à 08:57, michael.andre.pearce <
> > > > > > > >>>>>> michael.andre.pearce@me.com.INVALID> a écrit :
> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>>>> I assume the plan is to cover all repos, not just
> > artemis.Sent
> > > > > > > from
> > > > > > > >>>>> my
> > > > > > > >>>>>> Galaxy
> > > > > > > >>>>>>>> -------- Original message --------From: Clebert Suconic
> > <
> > > > > > > >>>>>> clebert.suconic@gmail.com> Date: 06/03/2021 14:33
> > (GMT+00:00) To:
> > > > > > > >>>>>> dev@activemq.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Renaming
> > master as
> > > > > > > main
> > > > > > > >>>>> We
> > > > > > > >>>>>> will have to create the main branch on gitbox and Infra
> > will make
> > > > > > > >>>>> theswitch
> > > > > > > >>>>>> on GitHub.On Sat, Mar 6, 2021 at 12:15 AM Jean-Baptiste
> > Onofre <
> > > > > > > >>>>>> jb@nanthrax.net>wrote:> Correct, we should focus on
> > gitbox (that’s
> > > > > > > why
> > > > > > > >>>>>> better to ask to infra).>> Regards> JB>> > Le 5 mars 2021
> > à 23:16,
> > > > > > > Justin
> > > > > > > >>>>>> Bertram <jb...@apache.org> a écrit :> >> > Aren't the
> > Apache
> > > > > > > GitHub
> > > > > > > >>>>>> repos just mirrors of the official versions on> > Apache's
> > > > > > > >>>>> infrastructure?
> > > > > > > >>>>>> I know when we merge PRs we push to> >
> > https://gitbox.apache.org/.
> > > > > > > If
> > > > > > > >>>>> the
> > > > > > > >>>>>> GitHub repo is just a mirror> wouldn't we> > have to
> > rename the
> > > > > > > branch on
> > > > > > > >>>>>> Apache first? I'm not real clear on all the> > details of
> > how the
> > > > > > > >>>>>> integration works so maybe that's wrong.> >> >> > Justin>
> > >> > On
> > > > > > > Fri,
> > > > > > > >>>>> Mar
> > > > > > > >>>>>> 5, 2021 at 4:06 PM Matt Pavlovich <ma...@gmail.com>>
> > wrote:> >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> GitHub solved the PR move if the rename is done via their
> > UI:> >>>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> https://github.com/github/renaming <
> > > > > > > https://github.com/github/renaming>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> -Matt> >>> >>> On Mar 5, 2021, at 2:54 PM, Clebert
> > Suconic <
> > > > > > > >>>>>> clebert.suconic@gmail.com> >> >> wrote:> >>>> >>> Good
> > point.>
> > > > > > > >>>> >>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> I’m not sure what to do with pending PRs> >>>> >>> In
> > artemis you
> > > > > > > could
> > > > > > > >>>>> use
> > > > > > > >>>>>> the scripts and they would work.> >>>> >>> On Fri, Mar 5,
> > 2021 at
> > > > > > > 2:54 PM
> > > > > > > >>>>>> Matt Pavlovich <ma...@gmail.com>> >> wrote:> >>>>
> > >>>> +1 no
> > > > > > > problem.
> > > > > > > >>>>>> Please to cover the CI jobs, so we don’t lose those.>
> > >>>> Thanks!>
> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 5, 2021, at 11:24 AM, Clebert Suconic <> >>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> clebert.suconic@gmail.com>> >>>> wrote:> >>>>>> >>>>> I
> > would like
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > >>>>>> propose to rename all of our git branches as main on>
> > >>>>> all of
> > > > > > > our
> > > > > > > >>>>>> branches. This would be a very first easy step to take
> > on> >>>>>
> > > > > > > renaming
> > > > > > > >>>>>> offensive language from our codebases.> >>>>>> >>>>> We
> > could allow
> > > > > > > some
> > > > > > > >>>>>> time before we do that, say 7 days after we> decide>
> > >>>>> to take
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >>>>>> move.> >>>>>> >>>>> Anyone sees a problem with that?>
> > >>>>>> >>>>>
> > > > > > > if
> > > > > > > >>>>>> anyone has internal forks depending on master (say if you
> > have a>
> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> downstream branch of ActiveMQ), you will likely have to
> > update your>
> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> internal git repos and scripts.> >>>>>> >>>>> We could
> > keep the
> > > > > > > master
> > > > > > > >>>>> for
> > > > > > > >>>>>> some time without being updated, until> we> >>>>> remove
> > it later.>
> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> --> >>> Clebert Suconic> >>> >>>> --Clebert Suconic
> > > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> --
> > > > > > > >>>>>> Clebert Suconic
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> --
> > > > > > > >> Clebert Suconic
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > Clebert Suconic
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Clebert Suconic
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Clebert Suconic
> >
--
Clebert Suconic
Re: [DISCUSS] Renaming master as main
Posted by Christopher Shannon <ch...@gmail.com>.
+1 from me to go ahead. Most projects seem to be moving to the model of
using "main" as the default branch so I think we should do the same.
On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 2:45 PM Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> That means we can go ahead with that then...
>
> if anyone have any objections, let me know..
>
>
> I will ask in the ticket for when that would be done.
>
> On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 4:10 AM Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Only 2 PRs in one repo closed unexpectedly, all the rest remained open
> > as expected (including newer and older PRs in the same repo; it's not
> > clear why those 2 were different).
> >
> > It is easy to spot the PRs affected if it happens and react to it as
> > needed, and would happen similarly with the other approach but
> > affecting all PRs, so I wouldnt especially delay things due to it
> > personally (and note Infra are backlogged, so you will likely need to
> > wait a bit already). Though of course merging anything that can be
> > first wouldnt be a bad thing.
> >
> > On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 18:11, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > I was just waiting the outcome from you before I went ahead with
> > > ActiveMQ changes..
> > >
> > >
> > > @all should we merge as many Pull Requests we would like and some
> > > cleanup before we go ahead with the change? since they are going to be
> > > closed apparently?
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 12:50 PM Robbie Gemmell
> > > <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Infra did a test change on a single repo last week and all the
> > > > remaining repos today, so we have now renamed all the Qpid repository
> > > > branches from master to main using GitHub.
> > > >
> > > > It was straightforward and as expected for the most part, though
> there
> > > > were a couple of slight oddities:
> > > > - A couple of PRs did close unexpectedly saying master was deleted,
> > > > but the rest remained open and were rebased onto main as expected.
> > > > It's easy to tell if it happens.
> > > > - A variable number of commits per repo (some none, mostly only a
> few,
> > > > but 40 in one case) caused some 'replay'-like behaviour without clear
> > > > reason, provoking JIRA commit comment updates and related mails as if
> > > > they had just been pushed afresh.
> > > >
> > > > In short though these oddities were no big deal and the overall
> > > > outcome is nicer than the new-branch + delete-master approach. I'd
> > > > suggest asking to do it the same way.
> > > >
> > > > The related infra JIRA for Qpid was
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21589
> > > >
> > > > Robbie
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 at 20:21, Clebert Suconic <
> clebert.suconic@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Using the GitHub to rename would be great as any PRs will probably
> be
> > > > > included.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks Rob.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 4:08 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofre <
> jb@nanthrax.net>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Nice ! Thanks for the update !
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > JB
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Le 16 mars 2021 à 19:08, Robbie Gemmell <
> robbie.gemmell@gmail.com> a
> > > > > > écrit :
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I was originally going to begin the rename process for Qpid
> tomorrow,
> > > > > > > but in the past week I have either done or been on the
> receiving end
> > > > > > > of some GitHub-based renames elsewhere which gave a nicer end
> result
> > > > > > > than pushing a new branch and updating the default would.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Knowing that it is an option to push to the Apache GitHub
> repos I had
> > > > > > > a chat with Infra about whether it might actually be possible
> for them
> > > > > > > to use the GitHub renaming tooling for this, as its just a
> nicer end
> > > > > > > state for everyone. Infra said it isnt something they have
> done before
> > > > > > > but would look into it, and could possibly try it out on the
> Qpid
> > > > > > > repos.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You might want to hold off on the ActiveMQ repo changes a
> little to
> > > > > > > see what the outcome of that is.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 at 15:34, Clebert Suconic <
> clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Thanks a lot, I have everything I need now
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> I plan to work on this next week.. I will follow up with
> progress as I
> > > > > > >> go over this thread.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 6:24 AM Robbie Gemmell <
> > > > > > robbie.gemmell@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> Yep, thats the only config we have for the website auto
> build, which
> > > > > > >>> is a standard build. Essentially we just enable it and tell
> it which
> > > > > > >>> branch to build changes from (the one matching whoami) and
> then the
> > > > > > >>> target branch to commit and push any output updates to,
> where they are
> > > > > > >>> then picked up from for the web servers.
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> The build itself occurs on a Builtbot CI instance at
> > > > > > >>> https://ci2.apache.org/#/builders/7. A mail is sent on each
> build to
> > > > > > >>> commits@, e.g the latest one is:
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rc14442fcfba8395bec5207f2c43b8dbde068f369fabe50de039509fc%40%3Ccommits.activemq.apache.org%3E
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> On Tue, 9 Mar 2021 at 22:46, Justin Bertram <
> jbertram@apache.org>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> The website actually uses Jekyll. The branch it uses is
> controlled
> > > > > > via the
> > > > > > >>>> .asf.yaml file [1]. More details about this are here [2].
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> Justin
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> [1]
> https://github.com/apache/activemq-website/blob/master/.asf.yaml
> > > > > > >>>> [2]
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INFRA/git+-+.asf.yaml+features#Git.asf.yamlfeatures-JekyllCMS
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 4:42 PM Clebert Suconic <
> > > > > > clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
> > > > > > >>>> wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> I see the website is the pelican system.
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> I'm not sure how the AMQ5 is configured on Jenkins...
> that's the
> > > > > > only thing
> > > > > > >>>>> I'm lost now.
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 4:31 PM Clebert Suconic <
> > > > > > clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
> > > > > > >>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> That's right.. I will do it for all the Branches...
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> At this point now I'm looking to what I would need to
> change on
> > > > > > ci-builds
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> I'm looking on ci-builds for things we would need to
> change..
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> however I don't understand how ActiveMQ5 is configured
> here:
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/ActiveMQ/job/ActiveMQ/
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> I could find the simple configuration on artemis, but
> AMQ5 is using
> > > > > > >>>>>> some fancy configuration that I don't know where it's
> taking it
> > > > > > from.
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> @Jb or anyone can you give me some pointers here? I'm
> really curious
> > > > > > >>>>>> now.. (I know you could say you would change it. .but at
> this point
> > > > > > >>>>>> I'm trying to understand what is going on :) )
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> Also: where is the build for the website? I can't find it
> on
> > > > > > >>>>>> ci-builds.apache.org
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 3:10 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofre <
> > > > > > jb@nanthrax.net>
> > > > > > >>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>> That’s my guess as well ;)
> > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>>> Le 9 mars 2021 à 08:57, michael.andre.pearce <
> > > > > > >>>>>> michael.andre.pearce@me.com.INVALID> a écrit :
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>>> I assume the plan is to cover all repos, not just
> artemis.Sent
> > > > > > from
> > > > > > >>>>> my
> > > > > > >>>>>> Galaxy
> > > > > > >>>>>>>> -------- Original message --------From: Clebert Suconic
> <
> > > > > > >>>>>> clebert.suconic@gmail.com> Date: 06/03/2021 14:33
> (GMT+00:00) To:
> > > > > > >>>>>> dev@activemq.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Renaming
> master as
> > > > > > main
> > > > > > >>>>> We
> > > > > > >>>>>> will have to create the main branch on gitbox and Infra
> will make
> > > > > > >>>>> theswitch
> > > > > > >>>>>> on GitHub.On Sat, Mar 6, 2021 at 12:15 AM Jean-Baptiste
> Onofre <
> > > > > > >>>>>> jb@nanthrax.net>wrote:> Correct, we should focus on
> gitbox (that’s
> > > > > > why
> > > > > > >>>>>> better to ask to infra).>> Regards> JB>> > Le 5 mars 2021
> à 23:16,
> > > > > > Justin
> > > > > > >>>>>> Bertram <jb...@apache.org> a écrit :> >> > Aren't the
> Apache
> > > > > > GitHub
> > > > > > >>>>>> repos just mirrors of the official versions on> > Apache's
> > > > > > >>>>> infrastructure?
> > > > > > >>>>>> I know when we merge PRs we push to> >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/.
> > > > > > If
> > > > > > >>>>> the
> > > > > > >>>>>> GitHub repo is just a mirror> wouldn't we> > have to
> rename the
> > > > > > branch on
> > > > > > >>>>>> Apache first? I'm not real clear on all the> > details of
> how the
> > > > > > >>>>>> integration works so maybe that's wrong.> >> >> > Justin>
> >> > On
> > > > > > Fri,
> > > > > > >>>>> Mar
> > > > > > >>>>>> 5, 2021 at 4:06 PM Matt Pavlovich <ma...@gmail.com>>
> wrote:> >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>>>>> GitHub solved the PR move if the rename is done via their
> UI:> >>>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>>>>> https://github.com/github/renaming <
> > > > > > https://github.com/github/renaming>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> -Matt> >>> >>> On Mar 5, 2021, at 2:54 PM, Clebert
> Suconic <
> > > > > > >>>>>> clebert.suconic@gmail.com> >> >> wrote:> >>>> >>> Good
> point.>
> > > > > > >>>> >>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> I’m not sure what to do with pending PRs> >>>> >>> In
> artemis you
> > > > > > could
> > > > > > >>>>> use
> > > > > > >>>>>> the scripts and they would work.> >>>> >>> On Fri, Mar 5,
> 2021 at
> > > > > > 2:54 PM
> > > > > > >>>>>> Matt Pavlovich <ma...@gmail.com>> >> wrote:> >>>>
> >>>> +1 no
> > > > > > problem.
> > > > > > >>>>>> Please to cover the CI jobs, so we don’t lose those.>
> >>>> Thanks!>
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 5, 2021, at 11:24 AM, Clebert Suconic <> >>
> > > > > > >>>>>> clebert.suconic@gmail.com>> >>>> wrote:> >>>>>> >>>>> I
> would like
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > >>>>>> propose to rename all of our git branches as main on>
> >>>>> all of
> > > > > > our
> > > > > > >>>>>> branches. This would be a very first easy step to take
> on> >>>>>
> > > > > > renaming
> > > > > > >>>>>> offensive language from our codebases.> >>>>>> >>>>> We
> could allow
> > > > > > some
> > > > > > >>>>>> time before we do that, say 7 days after we> decide>
> >>>>> to take
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > >>>>>> move.> >>>>>> >>>>> Anyone sees a problem with that?>
> >>>>>> >>>>>
> > > > > > if
> > > > > > >>>>>> anyone has internal forks depending on master (say if you
> have a>
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> downstream branch of ActiveMQ), you will likely have to
> update your>
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> internal git repos and scripts.> >>>>>> >>>>> We could
> keep the
> > > > > > master
> > > > > > >>>>> for
> > > > > > >>>>>> some time without being updated, until> we> >>>>> remove
> it later.>
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> --> >>> Clebert Suconic> >>> >>>> --Clebert Suconic
> > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> --
> > > > > > >>>>>> Clebert Suconic
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> --
> > > > > > >> Clebert Suconic
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > Clebert Suconic
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Clebert Suconic
>
>
>
> --
> Clebert Suconic
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Renaming master as main
Posted by Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com>.
That means we can go ahead with that then...
if anyone have any objections, let me know..
I will ask in the ticket for when that would be done.
On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 4:10 AM Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Only 2 PRs in one repo closed unexpectedly, all the rest remained open
> as expected (including newer and older PRs in the same repo; it's not
> clear why those 2 were different).
>
> It is easy to spot the PRs affected if it happens and react to it as
> needed, and would happen similarly with the other approach but
> affecting all PRs, so I wouldnt especially delay things due to it
> personally (and note Infra are backlogged, so you will likely need to
> wait a bit already). Though of course merging anything that can be
> first wouldnt be a bad thing.
>
> On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 18:11, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I was just waiting the outcome from you before I went ahead with
> > ActiveMQ changes..
> >
> >
> > @all should we merge as many Pull Requests we would like and some
> > cleanup before we go ahead with the change? since they are going to be
> > closed apparently?
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 12:50 PM Robbie Gemmell
> > <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Infra did a test change on a single repo last week and all the
> > > remaining repos today, so we have now renamed all the Qpid repository
> > > branches from master to main using GitHub.
> > >
> > > It was straightforward and as expected for the most part, though there
> > > were a couple of slight oddities:
> > > - A couple of PRs did close unexpectedly saying master was deleted,
> > > but the rest remained open and were rebased onto main as expected.
> > > It's easy to tell if it happens.
> > > - A variable number of commits per repo (some none, mostly only a few,
> > > but 40 in one case) caused some 'replay'-like behaviour without clear
> > > reason, provoking JIRA commit comment updates and related mails as if
> > > they had just been pushed afresh.
> > >
> > > In short though these oddities were no big deal and the overall
> > > outcome is nicer than the new-branch + delete-master approach. I'd
> > > suggest asking to do it the same way.
> > >
> > > The related infra JIRA for Qpid was
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21589
> > >
> > > Robbie
> > >
> > > On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 at 20:21, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Using the GitHub to rename would be great as any PRs will probably be
> > > > included.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks Rob.
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 4:08 PM Jean-Baptiste Onofre <jb...@nanthrax.net>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Nice ! Thanks for the update !
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > JB
> > > > >
> > > > > > Le 16 mars 2021 à 19:08, Robbie Gemmell <ro...@gmail.com> a
> > > > > écrit :
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I was originally going to begin the rename process for Qpid tomorrow,
> > > > > > but in the past week I have either done or been on the receiving end
> > > > > > of some GitHub-based renames elsewhere which gave a nicer end result
> > > > > > than pushing a new branch and updating the default would.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Knowing that it is an option to push to the Apache GitHub repos I had
> > > > > > a chat with Infra about whether it might actually be possible for them
> > > > > > to use the GitHub renaming tooling for this, as its just a nicer end
> > > > > > state for everyone. Infra said it isnt something they have done before
> > > > > > but would look into it, and could possibly try it out on the Qpid
> > > > > > repos.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You might want to hold off on the ActiveMQ repo changes a little to
> > > > > > see what the outcome of that is.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, 11 Mar 2021 at 15:34, Clebert Suconic <cl...@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Thanks a lot, I have everything I need now
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> I plan to work on this next week.. I will follow up with progress as I
> > > > > >> go over this thread.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 6:24 AM Robbie Gemmell <
> > > > > robbie.gemmell@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Yep, thats the only config we have for the website auto build, which
> > > > > >>> is a standard build. Essentially we just enable it and tell it which
> > > > > >>> branch to build changes from (the one matching whoami) and then the
> > > > > >>> target branch to commit and push any output updates to, where they are
> > > > > >>> then picked up from for the web servers.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> The build itself occurs on a Builtbot CI instance at
> > > > > >>> https://ci2.apache.org/#/builders/7. A mail is sent on each build to
> > > > > >>> commits@, e.g the latest one is:
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/rc14442fcfba8395bec5207f2c43b8dbde068f369fabe50de039509fc%40%3Ccommits.activemq.apache.org%3E
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> On Tue, 9 Mar 2021 at 22:46, Justin Bertram <jb...@apache.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> The website actually uses Jekyll. The branch it uses is controlled
> > > > > via the
> > > > > >>>> .asf.yaml file [1]. More details about this are here [2].
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> Justin
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/activemq-website/blob/master/.asf.yaml
> > > > > >>>> [2]
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/INFRA/git+-+.asf.yaml+features#Git.asf.yamlfeatures-JekyllCMS
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 4:42 PM Clebert Suconic <
> > > > > clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
> > > > > >>>> wrote:
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>>> I see the website is the pelican system.
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> I'm not sure how the AMQ5 is configured on Jenkins... that's the
> > > > > only thing
> > > > > >>>>> I'm lost now.
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 4:31 PM Clebert Suconic <
> > > > > clebert.suconic@gmail.com>
> > > > > >>>>> wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> That's right.. I will do it for all the Branches...
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> At this point now I'm looking to what I would need to change on
> > > > > ci-builds
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> I'm looking on ci-builds for things we would need to change..
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> however I don't understand how ActiveMQ5 is configured here:
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> https://ci-builds.apache.org/job/ActiveMQ/job/ActiveMQ/
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> I could find the simple configuration on artemis, but AMQ5 is using
> > > > > >>>>>> some fancy configuration that I don't know where it's taking it
> > > > > from.
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> @Jb or anyone can you give me some pointers here? I'm really curious
> > > > > >>>>>> now.. (I know you could say you would change it. .but at this point
> > > > > >>>>>> I'm trying to understand what is going on :) )
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> Also: where is the build for the website? I can't find it on
> > > > > >>>>>> ci-builds.apache.org
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> On Tue, Mar 9, 2021 at 3:10 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofre <
> > > > > jb@nanthrax.net>
> > > > > >>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>> That’s my guess as well ;)
> > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>> Le 9 mars 2021 à 08:57, michael.andre.pearce <
> > > > > >>>>>> michael.andre.pearce@me.com.INVALID> a écrit :
> > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>> I assume the plan is to cover all repos, not just artemis.Sent
> > > > > from
> > > > > >>>>> my
> > > > > >>>>>> Galaxy
> > > > > >>>>>>>> -------- Original message --------From: Clebert Suconic <
> > > > > >>>>>> clebert.suconic@gmail.com> Date: 06/03/2021 14:33 (GMT+00:00) To:
> > > > > >>>>>> dev@activemq.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Renaming master as
> > > > > main
> > > > > >>>>> We
> > > > > >>>>>> will have to create the main branch on gitbox and Infra will make
> > > > > >>>>> theswitch
> > > > > >>>>>> on GitHub.On Sat, Mar 6, 2021 at 12:15 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofre <
> > > > > >>>>>> jb@nanthrax.net>wrote:> Correct, we should focus on gitbox (that’s
> > > > > why
> > > > > >>>>>> better to ask to infra).>> Regards> JB>> > Le 5 mars 2021 à 23:16,
> > > > > Justin
> > > > > >>>>>> Bertram <jb...@apache.org> a écrit :> >> > Aren't the Apache
> > > > > GitHub
> > > > > >>>>>> repos just mirrors of the official versions on> > Apache's
> > > > > >>>>> infrastructure?
> > > > > >>>>>> I know when we merge PRs we push to> > https://gitbox.apache.org/.
> > > > > If
> > > > > >>>>> the
> > > > > >>>>>> GitHub repo is just a mirror> wouldn't we> > have to rename the
> > > > > branch on
> > > > > >>>>>> Apache first? I'm not real clear on all the> > details of how the
> > > > > >>>>>> integration works so maybe that's wrong.> >> >> > Justin> >> > On
> > > > > Fri,
> > > > > >>>>> Mar
> > > > > >>>>>> 5, 2021 at 4:06 PM Matt Pavlovich <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:> >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>>>>> GitHub solved the PR move if the rename is done via their UI:> >>>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>>>>> https://github.com/github/renaming <
> > > > > https://github.com/github/renaming>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> -Matt> >>> >>> On Mar 5, 2021, at 2:54 PM, Clebert Suconic <
> > > > > >>>>>> clebert.suconic@gmail.com> >> >> wrote:> >>>> >>> Good point.>
> > > > > >>>> >>>
> > > > > >>>>>> I’m not sure what to do with pending PRs> >>>> >>> In artemis you
> > > > > could
> > > > > >>>>> use
> > > > > >>>>>> the scripts and they would work.> >>>> >>> On Fri, Mar 5, 2021 at
> > > > > 2:54 PM
> > > > > >>>>>> Matt Pavlovich <ma...@gmail.com>> >> wrote:> >>>> >>>> +1 no
> > > > > problem.
> > > > > >>>>>> Please to cover the CI jobs, so we don’t lose those.> >>>> Thanks!>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 5, 2021, at 11:24 AM, Clebert Suconic <> >>
> > > > > >>>>>> clebert.suconic@gmail.com>> >>>> wrote:> >>>>>> >>>>> I would like
> > > > > to
> > > > > >>>>>> propose to rename all of our git branches as main on> >>>>> all of
> > > > > our
> > > > > >>>>>> branches. This would be a very first easy step to take on> >>>>>
> > > > > renaming
> > > > > >>>>>> offensive language from our codebases.> >>>>>> >>>>> We could allow
> > > > > some
> > > > > >>>>>> time before we do that, say 7 days after we> decide> >>>>> to take
> > > > > the
> > > > > >>>>>> move.> >>>>>> >>>>> Anyone sees a problem with that?> >>>>>> >>>>>
> > > > > if
> > > > > >>>>>> anyone has internal forks depending on master (say if you have a>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> downstream branch of ActiveMQ), you will likely have to update your>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> internal git repos and scripts.> >>>>>> >>>>> We could keep the
> > > > > master
> > > > > >>>>> for
> > > > > >>>>>> some time without being updated, until> we> >>>>> remove it later.>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> --> >>> Clebert Suconic> >>> >>>> --Clebert Suconic
> > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> --
> > > > > >>>>>> Clebert Suconic
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> --
> > > > > >> Clebert Suconic
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > Clebert Suconic
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Clebert Suconic
--
Clebert Suconic