tika-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tyler Palsulich <tpalsul...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Moving SCM to Git
Date Sun, 03 Jan 2016 03:39:50 GMT
Hi,

Just reiterating my +1 for the move. A huge benefit in my eyes is a reduced
barrier to entry for new developers and contributors.

Tyler
On Jan 2, 2016 4:34 PM, "Mattmann, Chris A (3980)" <
chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:

> One final note - this isn't a vote to make GitHub the canonical repo. In
> the future if Whimsy goes well I'd like to explore that but here I am
> simply proposing to use the ASF writeable Git repos (which happen to be
> mirrored to GH).
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Jan 2, 2016, at 4:31 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (3980) <
> chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
> >
> > Hey Ken,
> >
> > Projects have been using writeable git repos at the ASF since 2009-2010.
> The recent conversation at the foundation level was - should we allow
> GitHub as a canonical external repo and more broadly - is this possible in
> general? The Whimsy project is currently undergoing that experiment and
> it's going well but nothing official to report yet.
> >
> > Beyond that - projects can release from and use writeable Git repos.
> Some projects were getting around history by squashing commits ahead of the
> repo and getting around infra's checks on master (aka trunk) by using
> different main branch names but we're not in that boat.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Chris
> >
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> >> On Jan 2, 2016, at 3:47 PM, Ken Krugler <kkrugler_lists@transpac.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Chris,
> >>
> >> I'd be +1, but I don't have the essence of the "Re: git (Was:
> ASF/GitHub Findings of Fact / Statements of Principles)" thread on the
> Apache members list clearly in my mind.
> >>
> >> Specifically, while that thread was spinning merrily away, there were
> concerns about immutability when using git.
> >>
> >> E.g. one comment was...
> >>
> >>> releases must correspond to an immutable tag in a repository on ASF
> hardware.
> >>>
> >>> "Canonical" is needed for releases, and for IP provenance, so I'd
> augment the above with a second requirement: for each release tag, we must
> be able to establish the provenance of all files referenced by that tag.
> >>>
> >>> I believe that is the essence of the Foundation's requirements for
> version control. Both can be satisfied via svn or git. Git may require
> external sources to satisfy one or both of those requirements. svn
> inherently has the first nailed, and is much easier for provenance (there
> may be edge cases I'm missing offhand, but we know the ICLA/grant
> associated with each change leading up to the tagged release).
> >>
> >> Did it wind up as "projects can experiment with using git for official
> releases"?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> -- Ken
> >>
> >>> From: Mattmann, Chris A (3980)
> >>> Sent: January 1, 2016 8:30:16pm PST
> >>> To: dev@tika.apache.org
> >>> Subject: [VOTE] Moving SCM to Git
> >>>
> >>> Hi Everyone,
> >>>
> >>> DISCUSS thread here: http://s.apache.org/wVE
> >>>
> >>> Time to officially VOTE on moving Tika to Git. I’ve made a wiki
> >>> page for our SCM explaining how to use Git at Apache, and how to
> >>> use it with Github, and how to use it even in a traditional SVN
> >>> sense. The page is here:
> >>>
> >>> https://wiki.apache.org/tika/UsingGit
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I’ve also linked it from the main wiki page. I took the liberty
> >>> of updating the only other 2 pages on the wiki that referenced
> >>> SCM with (pending) Git instructions as well:
> >>>
> >>> https://wiki.apache.org/tika/DeveloperResources
> >>> https://wiki.apache.org/tika/ReleaseProcess
> >>>
> >>> From the DISCUSS thread it would seem the following members of
> >>> the community support this move:
> >>>
> >>> Chris Mattmann
> >>> Tyler Palsulich
> >>> Bob Paulin
> >>> Hong-Thai Nguyen
> >>>
> >>> Oleg Tikhonov
> >>> David Meikle
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Given the above I’m going to count the above people as +1 in
> >>> this VOTE if I don’t hear otherwise.
> >>>
> >>> Nick Burch said he would be more supportive if there was a guide,
> >>> so I made one and updated the other wiki docs as above so hopefully
> >>> that garners his VOTE.
> >>>
> >>> If you’d like to revise your VOTE or to VOTE for the first time,
> >>> please use the ballot below:
> >>>
> >>> [ ] +1 Move the Apache Tika source control to Writeable Git repos
> >>> at the ASF
> >>> [ ] +0 Indifferent.
> >>> [ ] -1 Don’t move the Apache Tika source control to Writeable Git
> >>> repos at the ASF because..
> >>>
> >>> Of course, given the conversation I am +1 for this.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for VOTE’ing I’ll leave the VOTE open through next Friday.
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>> Chris
> >>>
> >>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
> >>> Chief Architect
> >>> Instrument Software and Science Data Systems Section (398)
> >>> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
> >>> Office: 168-519, Mailstop: 168-527
> >>> Email: chris.a.mattmann@nasa.gov
> >>> WWW:  http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
> >>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>> Adjunct Associate Professor, Computer Science Department
> >>> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
> >>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>
> >> --------------------------
> >> Ken Krugler
> >> +1 530-210-6378
> >> http://www.scaleunlimited.com
> >> custom big data solutions & training
> >> Hadoop, Cascading, Cassandra & Solr
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --------------------------
> >> Ken Krugler
> >> +1 530-210-6378
> >> http://www.scaleunlimited.com
> >> custom big data solutions & training
> >> Hadoop, Cascading, Cassandra & Solr
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>

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