You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@streams.apache.org by Suneel Marthi <sm...@apache.org> on 2017/07/05 17:22:05 UTC
{VOTE} move to gitbox
This is a vote to move all streams repos to Gitbox, some of the other
projects have started to move their repos to gitbox.
Here's my +1 binding.
This vote will close in 72 hrs.
Follow up: {VOTE} move to gitbox
Posted by Steve Blackmon <sb...@apache.org>.
Last night we got github.com/apache/streams pointed at
git.apache.org/streams.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14854
I have opened the request for gitbox to be enabled.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14896
If you have not yet, please make sure you are setup on the github apache
org and have MFA enabled.
https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/
Re: {VOTE} move to gitbox
Posted by Joey Frazee <jo...@icloud.com>.
+1
We already do the code reviews and PRs almost entirely on Github and probably some of us use the sync'd Github repo for our upstream remote and not Apache so this will cut out some fat.
> On Jul 5, 2017, at 5:35 PM, Suneel Marthi <sm...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 4:39 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2017-07-05 22:16, Suneel Marthi wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 3:40 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2017-07-05 20:31, Suneel Marthi wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Just this week, Apache OpenNLP moved all of their repos to gitbox.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Hmm, just checked their mailinglists and only found one single thread
>>>> voting
>>>> on that move, again without *any* context.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/b2b7c066b79f1f13f733b9b
>>> 205c71c57e156a7577a14b7061cbc8610@%3Cdev.opennlp.apache.org%3E
>>> <https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/b2b7c066b79f1f13f733b9
>>> b205c71c57e156a7577a14b7061cbc8610@%3Cdev.opennlp.apache.org%3E>
>>>
>>>
>> Yes, that's the one single thread I could find.
>> But no argument or context there either.
>> Maybe everyone voting on this at openNLP already knows everything about
>> gitbox,
>> or they just voted blindly, hoping for the best?
>>
>> I'm happy to vote on this, but I'm still clueless for what.
>
>
> With the present setup (without gitbox): this is how u have to merge the
> PRs (the cumbersome, manual way) -
> http://mahout.apache.org/developers/github.html
>
> With gitbox setup, this is how u do it (the way its supposed to be, see the
> section merging a Pull Request) - http://opennlp.apache.org/using-git.html
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If anything, it greatly simplifies committer workflow as Steve's
>>>>> mentioned
>>>>> before.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> How, in which way?
>>>> Sure, I get github and git in general, but I cannot find *any*
>>>> explanation
>>>> or documentation concerning gitbox.
>>>>
>>>> I won't, can't really, vote positively on this without some context.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2017-07-05 19:22, Suneel Marthi wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is a vote to move all streams repos to Gitbox, some of the other
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> projects have started to move their repos to gitbox.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This was discussed before, and while I probably will be +1,
>>>>>> I'm still clueless what gitbox provides, allows, enabled and what
>>>>>> restrictions/limitations it imposes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> While I suppose it to be 'cool' and 'it'll be great', as (P)PMC we
>>>>>> should *know* what we're getting (or accepting) by moving to gitbox,
>>>>>> *before* deciding.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here's my +1 binding.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This vote will close in 72 hrs.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
Re: {VOTE} move to gitbox
Posted by Suneel Marthi <sm...@apache.org>.
We seem to have consensus to move to gitbox - this vote is now closed and
we have 4 +1s, will work with Infra to move to gitbox.
On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 3:55 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
> On 2017-07-06 00:35, Suneel Marthi wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 4:39 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
>>
>> On 2017-07-05 22:16, Suneel Marthi wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 3:40 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 2017-07-05 20:31, Suneel Marthi wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Just this week, Apache OpenNLP moved all of their repos to gitbox.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hmm, just checked their mailinglists and only found one single thread
>>>>> voting
>>>>> on that move, again without *any* context.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/b2b7c066b79f1f13f733b9b
>>>> 205c71c57e156a7577a14b7061cbc8610@%3Cdev.opennlp.apache.org%3E
>>>> <https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/b2b7c066b79f1f13f733b9
>>>> b205c71c57e156a7577a14b7061cbc8610@%3Cdev.opennlp.apache.org%3E>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes, that's the one single thread I could find.
>>> But no argument or context there either.
>>> Maybe everyone voting on this at openNLP already knows everything about
>>> gitbox,
>>> or they just voted blindly, hoping for the best?
>>>
>>> I'm happy to vote on this, but I'm still clueless for what.
>>>
>>
>>
>> With the present setup (without gitbox): this is how u have to merge the
>> PRs (the cumbersome, manual way) -
>> http://mahout.apache.org/developers/github.html
>>
>> With gitbox setup, this is how u do it (the way its supposed to be, see
>> the
>> section merging a Pull Request) - http://opennlp.apache.org/usin
>> g-git.html
>>
>>
> Thanks, that is helpful, even if IMO still very thin, too thin,
> documentation.
>
> So I understand that with gitbox the (primary?) upstream repository to
> push to
> now is @github, no longer @apache. Or might this be both?
>
> However https://github.com/apache/opennlp still indicates it is mirrored
> from
> git://git.apache.org/opennlp.git.
> Then are these now bidirectionally synchronized? If so, then how are
> conflicts
> resolved/prevented, shouldn't there some guidelines/rules for that?
> Is it still allowed or even possible to push to the repository @apache?
>
> The OpenNLP website doesn't provide any help or explanation either, while I
> think important usage rules like these need to be spelled out and
> documented by
> the project.
>
> Another question: will we (have to) stick to using JIRA for issue
> tracking, or
> with gitbox might github issue tracking be used as well?
> Note: I think the latter to be not such a great idea.
> Also: is it possible to add JIRA integration with the Github repository?
>
> OpenNLP JIRA issues don't show or link to/index related git commits while
> IMO *that* would be very useful to have.
>
> Anyhow, I understand the benefit of directly using and pushing to github
> so I'm OK and +1 on moving to gitbox if this now is an 'endorsed' solution
> at
> Apache.
>
> But I also strongly dislike the fact there is zero documentation and also
> no
> Apache guidelines how gitbox can and may, and may not, be used.
>
> Ate
>
>
>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> If anything, it greatly simplifies committer workflow as Steve's
>>>>>
>>>>>> mentioned
>>>>>> before.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How, in which way?
>>>>> Sure, I get github and git in general, but I cannot find *any*
>>>>> explanation
>>>>> or documentation concerning gitbox.
>>>>>
>>>>> I won't, can't really, vote positively on this without some context.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2017-07-05 19:22, Suneel Marthi wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is a vote to move all streams repos to Gitbox, some of the other
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> projects have started to move their repos to gitbox.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This was discussed before, and while I probably will be +1,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm still clueless what gitbox provides, allows, enabled and what
>>>>>>> restrictions/limitations it imposes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> While I suppose it to be 'cool' and 'it'll be great', as (P)PMC we
>>>>>>> should *know* what we're getting (or accepting) by moving to gitbox,
>>>>>>> *before* deciding.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Here's my +1 binding.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This vote will close in 72 hrs.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: {VOTE} move to gitbox
Posted by Suneel Marthi <su...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 4:47 PM, Matt Franklin <m....@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 12:55 PM Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
>
> > On 2017-07-06 00:35, Suneel Marthi wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 4:39 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 2017-07-05 22:16, Suneel Marthi wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 3:40 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> On 2017-07-05 20:31, Suneel Marthi wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Just this week, Apache OpenNLP moved all of their repos to gitbox.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> Hmm, just checked their mailinglists and only found one single
> thread
> > >>>> voting
> > >>>> on that move, again without *any* context.
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/b2b7c066b79f1f13f733b9b
> > >>> 205c71c57e156a7577a14b7061cbc8610@%3Cdev.opennlp.apache.org%3E
> > >>> <https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/b2b7c066b79f1f13f733b9
> > >>> b205c71c57e156a7577a14b7061cbc8610@%3Cdev.opennlp.apache.org%3E>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >> Yes, that's the one single thread I could find.
> > >> But no argument or context there either.
> > >> Maybe everyone voting on this at openNLP already knows everything
> about
> > >> gitbox,
> > >> or they just voted blindly, hoping for the best?
> > >>
> > >> I'm happy to vote on this, but I'm still clueless for what.
> > >
> > >
> > > With the present setup (without gitbox): this is how u have to merge
> the
> > > PRs (the cumbersome, manual way) -
> > > http://mahout.apache.org/developers/github.html
> > >
> > > With gitbox setup, this is how u do it (the way its supposed to be, see
> > the
> > > section merging a Pull Request) -
> > http://opennlp.apache.org/using-git.html
> > >
> >
> > Thanks, that is helpful, even if IMO still very thin, too thin,
> > documentation.
> >
> > So I understand that with gitbox the (primary?) upstream repository to
> > push to
> > now is @github, no longer @apache. Or might this be both?
> >
> > However https://github.com/apache/opennlp still indicates it is mirrored
> > from
> > git://git.apache.org/opennlp.git.
> > Then are these now bidirectionally synchronized? If so, then how are
> > conflicts
> > resolved/prevented, shouldn't there some guidelines/rules for that?
> > Is it still allowed or even possible to push to the repository @apache?
> >
> > The OpenNLP website doesn't provide any help or explanation either,
> while I
> > think important usage rules like these need to be spelled out and
> > documented by
> > the project.
> >
> > Another question: will we (have to) stick to using JIRA for issue
> > tracking, or
> > with gitbox might github issue tracking be used as well?
> > Note: I think the latter to be not such a great idea.
> > Also: is it possible to add JIRA integration with the Github repository?
> >
>
> Great question. IIRC, there is no real requirement to use JIRA for a
> project's defect tracking, it is just common to do so. Any particular
> reason you dislike GitHub issues? It might further simplify the workflow.
>
There is gitbox - jira integration in place and its (finally!) functional,
so nothing changes on that front.
>
>
>
> >
> > OpenNLP JIRA issues don't show or link to/index related git commits while
> > IMO
> > *that* would be very useful to have.
> >
> > Anyhow, I understand the benefit of directly using and pushing to github
> > so I'm OK and +1 on moving to gitbox if this now is an 'endorsed'
> solution
> > at
> > Apache.
> >
> > But I also strongly dislike the fact there is zero documentation and also
> > no
> > Apache guidelines how gitbox can and may, and may not, be used.
> >
>
> Agree on the lack of documentation. Since @smarthi is a big proponent,
> maybe he will improve the documentation ;)
>
> I am a big proponent of all things verbal, and completely
anti-documentation.
Sorry i will not be able to help with improving the documentation. :)
>
> >
> > Ate
> >
> > >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> If anything, it greatly simplifies committer workflow as Steve's
> > >>>>> mentioned
> > >>>>> before.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> How, in which way?
> > >>>> Sure, I get github and git in general, but I cannot find *any*
> > >>>> explanation
> > >>>> or documentation concerning gitbox.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I won't, can't really, vote positively on this without some context.
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On 2017-07-05 19:22, Suneel Marthi wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> This is a vote to move all streams repos to Gitbox, some of the
> > other
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> projects have started to move their repos to gitbox.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> This was discussed before, and while I probably will be +1,
> > >>>>>> I'm still clueless what gitbox provides, allows, enabled and what
> > >>>>>> restrictions/limitations it imposes.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> While I suppose it to be 'cool' and 'it'll be great', as (P)PMC we
> > >>>>>> should *know* what we're getting (or accepting) by moving to
> gitbox,
> > >>>>>> *before* deciding.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Here's my +1 binding.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> This vote will close in 72 hrs.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >
> >
> >
>
Re: {VOTE} move to gitbox
Posted by Matt Franklin <m....@gmail.com>.
On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 12:55 PM Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
> On 2017-07-06 00:35, Suneel Marthi wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 4:39 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
> >
> >> On 2017-07-05 22:16, Suneel Marthi wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 3:40 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 2017-07-05 20:31, Suneel Marthi wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Just this week, Apache OpenNLP moved all of their repos to gitbox.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> Hmm, just checked their mailinglists and only found one single thread
> >>>> voting
> >>>> on that move, again without *any* context.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/b2b7c066b79f1f13f733b9b
> >>> 205c71c57e156a7577a14b7061cbc8610@%3Cdev.opennlp.apache.org%3E
> >>> <https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/b2b7c066b79f1f13f733b9
> >>> b205c71c57e156a7577a14b7061cbc8610@%3Cdev.opennlp.apache.org%3E>
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Yes, that's the one single thread I could find.
> >> But no argument or context there either.
> >> Maybe everyone voting on this at openNLP already knows everything about
> >> gitbox,
> >> or they just voted blindly, hoping for the best?
> >>
> >> I'm happy to vote on this, but I'm still clueless for what.
> >
> >
> > With the present setup (without gitbox): this is how u have to merge the
> > PRs (the cumbersome, manual way) -
> > http://mahout.apache.org/developers/github.html
> >
> > With gitbox setup, this is how u do it (the way its supposed to be, see
> the
> > section merging a Pull Request) -
> http://opennlp.apache.org/using-git.html
> >
>
> Thanks, that is helpful, even if IMO still very thin, too thin,
> documentation.
>
> So I understand that with gitbox the (primary?) upstream repository to
> push to
> now is @github, no longer @apache. Or might this be both?
>
> However https://github.com/apache/opennlp still indicates it is mirrored
> from
> git://git.apache.org/opennlp.git.
> Then are these now bidirectionally synchronized? If so, then how are
> conflicts
> resolved/prevented, shouldn't there some guidelines/rules for that?
> Is it still allowed or even possible to push to the repository @apache?
>
> The OpenNLP website doesn't provide any help or explanation either, while I
> think important usage rules like these need to be spelled out and
> documented by
> the project.
>
> Another question: will we (have to) stick to using JIRA for issue
> tracking, or
> with gitbox might github issue tracking be used as well?
> Note: I think the latter to be not such a great idea.
> Also: is it possible to add JIRA integration with the Github repository?
>
Great question. IIRC, there is no real requirement to use JIRA for a
project's defect tracking, it is just common to do so. Any particular
reason you dislike GitHub issues? It might further simplify the workflow.
>
> OpenNLP JIRA issues don't show or link to/index related git commits while
> IMO
> *that* would be very useful to have.
>
> Anyhow, I understand the benefit of directly using and pushing to github
> so I'm OK and +1 on moving to gitbox if this now is an 'endorsed' solution
> at
> Apache.
>
> But I also strongly dislike the fact there is zero documentation and also
> no
> Apache guidelines how gitbox can and may, and may not, be used.
>
Agree on the lack of documentation. Since @smarthi is a big proponent,
maybe he will improve the documentation ;)
>
> Ate
>
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> If anything, it greatly simplifies committer workflow as Steve's
> >>>>> mentioned
> >>>>> before.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> How, in which way?
> >>>> Sure, I get github and git in general, but I cannot find *any*
> >>>> explanation
> >>>> or documentation concerning gitbox.
> >>>>
> >>>> I won't, can't really, vote positively on this without some context.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 2017-07-05 19:22, Suneel Marthi wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This is a vote to move all streams repos to Gitbox, some of the
> other
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> projects have started to move their repos to gitbox.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> This was discussed before, and while I probably will be +1,
> >>>>>> I'm still clueless what gitbox provides, allows, enabled and what
> >>>>>> restrictions/limitations it imposes.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> While I suppose it to be 'cool' and 'it'll be great', as (P)PMC we
> >>>>>> should *know* what we're getting (or accepting) by moving to gitbox,
> >>>>>> *before* deciding.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Here's my +1 binding.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> This vote will close in 72 hrs.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
>
Re: {VOTE} move to gitbox
Posted by Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu>.
On 2017-07-06 00:35, Suneel Marthi wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 4:39 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
>
>> On 2017-07-05 22:16, Suneel Marthi wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 3:40 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2017-07-05 20:31, Suneel Marthi wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Just this week, Apache OpenNLP moved all of their repos to gitbox.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Hmm, just checked their mailinglists and only found one single thread
>>>> voting
>>>> on that move, again without *any* context.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/b2b7c066b79f1f13f733b9b
>>> 205c71c57e156a7577a14b7061cbc8610@%3Cdev.opennlp.apache.org%3E
>>> <https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/b2b7c066b79f1f13f733b9
>>> b205c71c57e156a7577a14b7061cbc8610@%3Cdev.opennlp.apache.org%3E>
>>>
>>>
>> Yes, that's the one single thread I could find.
>> But no argument or context there either.
>> Maybe everyone voting on this at openNLP already knows everything about
>> gitbox,
>> or they just voted blindly, hoping for the best?
>>
>> I'm happy to vote on this, but I'm still clueless for what.
>
>
> With the present setup (without gitbox): this is how u have to merge the
> PRs (the cumbersome, manual way) -
> http://mahout.apache.org/developers/github.html
>
> With gitbox setup, this is how u do it (the way its supposed to be, see the
> section merging a Pull Request) - http://opennlp.apache.org/using-git.html
>
Thanks, that is helpful, even if IMO still very thin, too thin, documentation.
So I understand that with gitbox the (primary?) upstream repository to push to
now is @github, no longer @apache. Or might this be both?
However https://github.com/apache/opennlp still indicates it is mirrored from
git://git.apache.org/opennlp.git.
Then are these now bidirectionally synchronized? If so, then how are conflicts
resolved/prevented, shouldn't there some guidelines/rules for that?
Is it still allowed or even possible to push to the repository @apache?
The OpenNLP website doesn't provide any help or explanation either, while I
think important usage rules like these need to be spelled out and documented by
the project.
Another question: will we (have to) stick to using JIRA for issue tracking, or
with gitbox might github issue tracking be used as well?
Note: I think the latter to be not such a great idea.
Also: is it possible to add JIRA integration with the Github repository?
OpenNLP JIRA issues don't show or link to/index related git commits while IMO
*that* would be very useful to have.
Anyhow, I understand the benefit of directly using and pushing to github
so I'm OK and +1 on moving to gitbox if this now is an 'endorsed' solution at
Apache.
But I also strongly dislike the fact there is zero documentation and also no
Apache guidelines how gitbox can and may, and may not, be used.
Ate
>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If anything, it greatly simplifies committer workflow as Steve's
>>>>> mentioned
>>>>> before.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> How, in which way?
>>>> Sure, I get github and git in general, but I cannot find *any*
>>>> explanation
>>>> or documentation concerning gitbox.
>>>>
>>>> I won't, can't really, vote positively on this without some context.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2017-07-05 19:22, Suneel Marthi wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is a vote to move all streams repos to Gitbox, some of the other
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> projects have started to move their repos to gitbox.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This was discussed before, and while I probably will be +1,
>>>>>> I'm still clueless what gitbox provides, allows, enabled and what
>>>>>> restrictions/limitations it imposes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> While I suppose it to be 'cool' and 'it'll be great', as (P)PMC we
>>>>>> should *know* what we're getting (or accepting) by moving to gitbox,
>>>>>> *before* deciding.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Here's my +1 binding.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This vote will close in 72 hrs.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: {VOTE} move to gitbox
Posted by Suneel Marthi <sm...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 4:39 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
> On 2017-07-05 22:16, Suneel Marthi wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 3:40 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
>>
>> On 2017-07-05 20:31, Suneel Marthi wrote:
>>>
>>> Just this week, Apache OpenNLP moved all of their repos to gitbox.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Hmm, just checked their mailinglists and only found one single thread
>>> voting
>>> on that move, again without *any* context.
>>>
>>
>>
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/b2b7c066b79f1f13f733b9b
>> 205c71c57e156a7577a14b7061cbc8610@%3Cdev.opennlp.apache.org%3E
>> <https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/b2b7c066b79f1f13f733b9
>> b205c71c57e156a7577a14b7061cbc8610@%3Cdev.opennlp.apache.org%3E>
>>
>>
> Yes, that's the one single thread I could find.
> But no argument or context there either.
> Maybe everyone voting on this at openNLP already knows everything about
> gitbox,
> or they just voted blindly, hoping for the best?
>
> I'm happy to vote on this, but I'm still clueless for what.
With the present setup (without gitbox): this is how u have to merge the
PRs (the cumbersome, manual way) -
http://mahout.apache.org/developers/github.html
With gitbox setup, this is how u do it (the way its supposed to be, see the
section merging a Pull Request) - http://opennlp.apache.org/using-git.html
>
>
>
>>>
>>>
>>> If anything, it greatly simplifies committer workflow as Steve's
>>>> mentioned
>>>> before.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> How, in which way?
>>> Sure, I get github and git in general, but I cannot find *any*
>>> explanation
>>> or documentation concerning gitbox.
>>>
>>> I won't, can't really, vote positively on this without some context.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 2017-07-05 19:22, Suneel Marthi wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This is a vote to move all streams repos to Gitbox, some of the other
>>>>>
>>>>>> projects have started to move their repos to gitbox.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This was discussed before, and while I probably will be +1,
>>>>> I'm still clueless what gitbox provides, allows, enabled and what
>>>>> restrictions/limitations it imposes.
>>>>>
>>>>> While I suppose it to be 'cool' and 'it'll be great', as (P)PMC we
>>>>> should *know* what we're getting (or accepting) by moving to gitbox,
>>>>> *before* deciding.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Here's my +1 binding.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This vote will close in 72 hrs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: {VOTE} move to gitbox
Posted by Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu>.
On 2017-07-05 22:16, Suneel Marthi wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 3:40 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
>
>> On 2017-07-05 20:31, Suneel Marthi wrote:
>>
>>> Just this week, Apache OpenNLP moved all of their repos to gitbox.
>>>
>>
>> Hmm, just checked their mailinglists and only found one single thread
>> voting
>> on that move, again without *any* context.
>
>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/b2b7c066b79f1f13f733b9b205c71c57e156a7577a14b7061cbc8610@%3Cdev.opennlp.apache.org%3E
> <https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/b2b7c066b79f1f13f733b9b205c71c57e156a7577a14b7061cbc8610@%3Cdev.opennlp.apache.org%3E>
>
Yes, that's the one single thread I could find.
But no argument or context there either.
Maybe everyone voting on this at openNLP already knows everything about gitbox,
or they just voted blindly, hoping for the best?
I'm happy to vote on this, but I'm still clueless for what.
>>
>>
>>
>>> If anything, it greatly simplifies committer workflow as Steve's mentioned
>>> before.
>>>
>>
>> How, in which way?
>> Sure, I get github and git in general, but I cannot find *any* explanation
>> or documentation concerning gitbox.
>>
>> I won't, can't really, vote positively on this without some context.
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2017-07-05 19:22, Suneel Marthi wrote:
>>>>
>>>> This is a vote to move all streams repos to Gitbox, some of the other
>>>>> projects have started to move their repos to gitbox.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> This was discussed before, and while I probably will be +1,
>>>> I'm still clueless what gitbox provides, allows, enabled and what
>>>> restrictions/limitations it imposes.
>>>>
>>>> While I suppose it to be 'cool' and 'it'll be great', as (P)PMC we
>>>> should *know* what we're getting (or accepting) by moving to gitbox,
>>>> *before* deciding.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Here's my +1 binding.
>>>>>
>>>>> This vote will close in 72 hrs.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: {VOTE} move to gitbox
Posted by Suneel Marthi <sm...@apache.org>.
On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 3:40 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
> On 2017-07-05 20:31, Suneel Marthi wrote:
>
>> Just this week, Apache OpenNLP moved all of their repos to gitbox.
>>
>
> Hmm, just checked their mailinglists and only found one single thread
> voting
> on that move, again without *any* context.
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/b2b7c066b79f1f13f733b9b205c71c57e156a7577a14b7061cbc8610@%3Cdev.opennlp.apache.org%3E
<https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/b2b7c066b79f1f13f733b9b205c71c57e156a7577a14b7061cbc8610@%3Cdev.opennlp.apache.org%3E>
>
>
>
>> If anything, it greatly simplifies committer workflow as Steve's mentioned
>> before.
>>
>
> How, in which way?
> Sure, I get github and git in general, but I cannot find *any* explanation
> or documentation concerning gitbox.
>
> I won't, can't really, vote positively on this without some context.
>
>
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
>>
>> On 2017-07-05 19:22, Suneel Marthi wrote:
>>>
>>> This is a vote to move all streams repos to Gitbox, some of the other
>>>> projects have started to move their repos to gitbox.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> This was discussed before, and while I probably will be +1,
>>> I'm still clueless what gitbox provides, allows, enabled and what
>>> restrictions/limitations it imposes.
>>>
>>> While I suppose it to be 'cool' and 'it'll be great', as (P)PMC we
>>> should *know* what we're getting (or accepting) by moving to gitbox,
>>> *before* deciding.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Here's my +1 binding.
>>>>
>>>> This vote will close in 72 hrs.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: {VOTE} move to gitbox
Posted by Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu>.
On 2017-07-05 20:31, Suneel Marthi wrote:
> Just this week, Apache OpenNLP moved all of their repos to gitbox.
Hmm, just checked their mailinglists and only found one single thread voting
on that move, again without *any* context.
>
> If anything, it greatly simplifies committer workflow as Steve's mentioned
> before.
How, in which way?
Sure, I get github and git in general, but I cannot find *any* explanation
or documentation concerning gitbox.
I won't, can't really, vote positively on this without some context.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
>
>> On 2017-07-05 19:22, Suneel Marthi wrote:
>>
>>> This is a vote to move all streams repos to Gitbox, some of the other
>>> projects have started to move their repos to gitbox.
>>>
>>
>> This was discussed before, and while I probably will be +1,
>> I'm still clueless what gitbox provides, allows, enabled and what
>> restrictions/limitations it imposes.
>>
>> While I suppose it to be 'cool' and 'it'll be great', as (P)PMC we
>> should *know* what we're getting (or accepting) by moving to gitbox,
>> *before* deciding.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Here's my +1 binding.
>>>
>>> This vote will close in 72 hrs.
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: {VOTE} move to gitbox
Posted by Suneel Marthi <sm...@apache.org>.
Just this week, Apache OpenNLP moved all of their repos to gitbox.
If anything, it greatly simplifies committer workflow as Steve's mentioned
before.
On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
> On 2017-07-05 19:22, Suneel Marthi wrote:
>
>> This is a vote to move all streams repos to Gitbox, some of the other
>> projects have started to move their repos to gitbox.
>>
>
> This was discussed before, and while I probably will be +1,
> I'm still clueless what gitbox provides, allows, enabled and what
> restrictions/limitations it imposes.
>
> While I suppose it to be 'cool' and 'it'll be great', as (P)PMC we
> should *know* what we're getting (or accepting) by moving to gitbox,
> *before* deciding.
>
>
>
>> Here's my +1 binding.
>>
>> This vote will close in 72 hrs.
>>
>>
>
Re: {VOTE} move to gitbox
Posted by Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu>.
On 2017-07-05 19:22, Suneel Marthi wrote:
> This is a vote to move all streams repos to Gitbox, some of the other
> projects have started to move their repos to gitbox.
This was discussed before, and while I probably will be +1,
I'm still clueless what gitbox provides, allows, enabled and what
restrictions/limitations it imposes.
While I suppose it to be 'cool' and 'it'll be great', as (P)PMC we
should *know* what we're getting (or accepting) by moving to gitbox,
*before* deciding.
>
> Here's my +1 binding.
>
> This vote will close in 72 hrs.
>
Re: {VOTE} move to gitbox
Posted by sblackmon <sb...@apache.org>.
+1 binding.
This will simplify the committer workflow significantly.
On July 5, 2017 at 12:22:15 PM, Suneel Marthi (smarthi@apache.org) wrote:
This is a vote to move all streams repos to Gitbox, some of the other
projects have started to move their repos to gitbox.
Here's my +1 binding.
This vote will close in 72 hrs.