bloodhound-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From John Chambers <cham...@apache.org>
Subject Re: git repo for new bloodhound core work
Date Wed, 23 Sep 2020 22:53:45 GMT
Nice work.
Will try and make time tomorrow to clone the new repo.

Cheers

John

On Wed, 23 Sep 2020, 18:54 Gary Martin, <gary.martin@physics.org> wrote:

> OK, more than enough delay I think.
>
> I'll create the new repo as 'bloodhound-core', leaving the notifications
> as their defaults which will mean github related update emails going to
> this list. As with most choices I expect they will not be difficult to
> change.
>
> Then I'll look at pushing just our current code over to the new main
> branch.
>
> On Wed, 23 Sep 2020, at 12:47 PM, Gary Martin wrote:
> > On Wed, 23 Sep 2020, at 12:11 PM, John Chambers wrote:
> > > I think using git for the new work is a great idea and I agree with
> Greg
> > > that 'bloodhound-core' seems a more sensible name.
> >
> > Cool :)
> >
> > > Though I am wondering if we need to make it obvious that this
> repository is
> > > for a different version than what is currently held in the svn repo?
> >
> > Yeah, the current situation may well be confusing.
> >
> > I don't think that there is much we can do with repo naming to help
> > this if we don't want names to get too complicated. README.md files
> > being updated to refer to the changes once the dust settles on some of
> > these decisions may well be appropriate though.
> >
> > I think I am willing to let a bit of confusion live on for the short
> > term as long as we are fairly clear about what is going on in this
> > list. If we can resolve this within a week or two, that would probably
> > be a good result.
> >
> > We may need to wait a short while if we want to update our old
> > bloodhound instance with this information as there is a bit of work
> > going on with it at the moment.
> >
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > >
> > > John
> > >
> > > On Wed, 23 Sep 2020 at 08:32, Daniel Brownridge <
> daniel.brownridge@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Go go git! This this is a really good move as (re)learning SVN was a
> > > > little bit of a barrier to entry for me.
> > > >
> > > > On 23/09/2020 03:53, Greg Stein wrote:
> > > > > How about just "bloodhound-core" ... the"bh" in "bhcore" seems
> redundant.
> > > > >
> > > > > Note that we could also ask Infra to perform some "magic" like
> renaming
> > > > > "bloodhound" to "bloodhound-archive" or such, and then make use of
> > > > > "bloodhound" going forward.
> > > > >
> > > > > Note that requesting a new git repository is available via
> > > > > selfserve.apache.org, and I'd just note to be careful to check the
> > > > answer,
> > > > > and avoiding creating bloodhound-bloodhound-blah. That used to be
a
> > > > common
> > > > > mistake (not sure if the code warns you nowadays).
> > > > >
> > > > > In any case, +1 for going ahead and switching to git, even though
> I'm an
> > > > > svn partisan. The advantages are much higher than any negatives.
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > -g
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 7:57 AM Gary Martin <
> gary.martin@physics.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Hi,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Judging by previous conversations long past (e.g. [1], [2]) I
> believe I
> > > > >> effectively have a mandate to switch to using git for at least
> some of
> > > > our
> > > > >> work and so I think we may as well try this out with the
> experimental
> > > > >> 'core' bloodhound stuff and see how we got from there.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I am not expecting to migrate any old bloodhound work to any
new
> git
> > > > repo
> > > > >> - any legacy work can stay in the subversion repo for any ongoing
> > > > >> maintenance. Also, I am not intending to drop any of our other
> current
> > > > >> usages of subversion, be they public or private so, for instance,
> the
> > > > >> "site" pages can remain there for now as I don't see as big
> advantages
> > > > in
> > > > >> moving these things for the moment.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>  From my point of view, I have been working with git more than
> > > > subversion
> > > > >> long enough that I am finding it a lot more difficult to work
> with.
> > > > Trying
> > > > >> to use git-svn doesn't feel a good enough solution for this,
> > > > particularly
> > > > >> at clone time. Maybe there are other solutions but I am not sure
> it is
> > > > >> worth putting in more effort to work them out.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> So, unless there are any big objections, I will be looking to
get
> this
> > > > >> done today. As there is already a bloodhound mirror of sorts
on
> github
> > > > with
> > > > >> the bloodhound name, I will be calling the new repo
> > > > >>
> > > > >>      "bloodhound-bhcore"
> > > > >>
> > > > >> This name obviously gives an impression that there will be
> multiple
> > > > repos
> > > > >> associated with the new bloodhound. If anyone cares to change
my
> mind on
> > > > >> this naming, I think the `bloodhound-` prefix is sensible and
> certainly
> > > > >> consistent with all other apache projects I have spotted so it
> will
> > > > just be
> > > > >> a question of whether there is a better "subname."
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Cheers,
> > > > >>      Gary
> > > > >>
> > > > >> [1]
> > > > >>
> > > >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/e2ce321621205b7131047e21c776ffcacd8516ecbac70ea2f665d761%40%3Cdev.bloodhound.apache.org%3E
> > > > >> [2]
> > > > >>
> > > >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/c3956214bd35ff57526d7e63fac86e2613499f6fc473275345ee6b61%40%3Cdev.bloodhound.apache.org%3E
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Cheers,
> >     Gary
>
> --
> Cheers,
>     Gary
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message