Menu
▾
▴
Re: [Gwt-openlayers-users] GWT-OpenLayers : Vote on an SCM move to BitBucket
|
From: Giuseppe La S. <giu...@ge...> - 2011-08-01 13:05:21
|
+ 1 here. 2011/8/1 Edwin Commandeur <com...@gm...> > Hi Dave, > > To vote just reply to the email with a YES or NO in the body. > > The nature of the repository will not change. The source code will > still be in a Mercurial repository. What changes will be the address > of the main repository. Currently the main repository (representing > the main line of work) is hosted at SourceForge. We would like to move > this repository to Bitbucket. > > Moving to Bitbucket makes things easier for committers as well as > administrators. For committers it means: > - Committers will have to sign up for Bitbucket (free). > - Committers can fork the project at Bitbucket to create their own sandbox > - If you are already have commit rights on SourceForge you can get > commit rights on the main repo at BitBucket (just send an email to me) > and pull changes from your fork into the main repo > - If you do not have commit rights then you can send pull requests, > so the admins can decide if they want to pull changes from your > sandbox (probably via a sandbox of the admin). > > Greetings, > Edwin > > On 1 August 2011 14:11, Dave Potts <dav...@pi...> wrote: > > Hi > > > > 1. How does one vote? do you have some type of link that can be used? > > 2. What happens to existing projects? > > > > I have an entire series of useful(?) changes (console,http,handler > > stratgy,projection etc) They are part of my personnel codebase how > could > > I integrate these changes if you change the nature of the Mercurial > > repository? > > > > > > Dave. > >> Hi All, > >> > >> This is for both the devel and users list. Currently the number of > emails > >> we > >> receive regarding contributing to the project indicates that the process > >> is > >> not straight forward, not easy and not intuitive. This would no doubt > >> preclude a lot of "would be" contributors from contributing and > something > >> I > >> believe we must address. > >> > >> Goal: Make it as easy as possible for everyone to contribute > >> without compromising the stability and quality of the codebase. > >> > >> At this point you can read on or jump the the conclusion and vote at the > >> end.... > >> > >> *How Distributed Version Control Should be Used (IMHO):* > >> > >> Distributed version control should pass through a hierarchy of > >> repositories > >> as it makes its way onto the stable baseline that releases are cut from > >> (Linus would probably call this a 'network of trust'). Believe it or > not, > >> this is more about opening up access to source control than it is > >> restricting it. Why, because this way everyone has a sandbox repository > to > >> fool around in, try things out, send them to others... do some RnD > e.t.c. > >> This means that rather than sending an email to the mailing list about > >> "how > >> can I contribute this" or "what is the process" or "here are some > patches" > >> or "can I have access to the repository" everybody can just work with > >> their > >> own repository... nice! It also means that since this is in a > repository, > >> it > >> can be easily promoted/pulled into the GWT-OpenLayers baseline ready for > >> the > >> next release! via 'pull requests'. > >> > >> *What's the problem with GWT-OpenLayer's and Folllowing this:* > >> > >> The fundamental problem is that its *NOT EASY* for us to adhere to such > a > >> process with SourceForge's source repository administration. It's > >> possible, > >> but certainly not easy. > >> -Creating a new repository for a developer involves too much manual > input. > >> A > >> new member needs to send a request (email), the request needs to be > >> granted, > >> the repository needs be be manually created by an administrator via > shell. > >> -Controlling access to each repository involves too much manual input, > >> SourceForge's administration web ui doesn't control who can push to each > >> repository. Administrators have to ssh in and then edit the > >> gwt-openlayers-USERNAME/.hg/.hgrc file to manually set repository > >> permissions. Again, this takes too much manual effort. > >> -Promoting code is also too manually intensive, the reason is that if an > >> individual actually gets their own repository, then then push up some > work > >> to it. The only want that it will be push up into the baseline > repository > >> that we release from is by sending emails, or patches via email e.t.c > and > >> this is often not an intuitive or inviting process. This process is not > >> intrinsic in SourceForge's source control hosting. > >> > >> *Addressing these Issues:* > >> > >> Rather than documenting, emailing and publishing a DIY process of making > a > >> contribution and how to work with source control, *we should target a > >> hosting service where the process is intrinsic in the service it's > >> self * :) The > >> sooner we can switch the better. > >> > >> *CONCLUSION* > >> > >> Some of the developers are already using bitbucket ( > >> https://bitbucket.org/gwtopenlayers) for Mercurial repository hosting. > >> This > >> can work concurrently with SF's mercurial. However, we should really > focus > >> on bitbucket's additional features (such as forking, pull requests > e.t.c). > >> These features provide us with a suitable service and an easy, intrinsic > >> process for contribution. Using SF and bitbucket concurrently is > something > >> I > >> would not recommend either, it doesn't solve our problem. > >> > >> *Please vote on a move to BitBucket and decommission SF's mercurial > >> repository YES/NO?* > >> > >> Cheers :) > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> Got Input? Slashdot Needs You. > >> Take our quick survey online. Come on, we don't ask for help often. > >> Plus, you'll get a chance to win $100 to spend on ThinkGeek. > >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/slashdot-survey > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Gwt-openlayers-users mailing list > >> Gwt...@li... > >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gwt-openlayers-users > >> > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Got Input? Slashdot Needs You. > > Take our quick survey online. Come on, we don't ask for help often. > > Plus, you'll get a chance to win $100 to spend on ThinkGeek. > > http://p.sf.net/sfu/slashdot-survey > > _______________________________________________ > > Gwt-openlayers-users mailing list > > Gwt...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gwt-openlayers-users > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Got Input? Slashdot Needs You. > Take our quick survey online. Come on, we don't ask for help often. > Plus, you'll get a chance to win $100 to spend on ThinkGeek. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/slashdot-survey > _______________________________________________ > Gwt-openlayers-users mailing list > Gwt...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gwt-openlayers-users > -- Giuseppe La Scaleia CNR - IMAA geoSDI Sviluppo Software C.da S. Loja 85050 Tito Scalo - POTENZA (PZ) Italia phone: +39 0971427305 fax: +39 0971 427271 mob: +39 3804697436 mail: giu...@ge... skype: glascaleia web: http://www.geosdi.org |
