Re: [Gwt-openlayers-users] GWT-OpenLayers : Vote on an SCM move to BitBucket

[lorenzo a. <lor...@gm...>]

+1 for me (YES)

2011/8/1 Andrew Hughes <ahh...@gm...>

> 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
>
>


-- 
Lorenzo Amato

Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche
Istituto di Metodologie per l'Analisi Ambientale - geoSDI
C.da S. Loja
85050  Tito Scalo - POTENZA (PZ)
Italia

phone:  +39 0971 427 305
fax:      +39 0971 427 271
mob:    +39 349 28 43 992
mail:     lor...@ge...
skype:  lorenzo.amato.skype
web:     www.geosdi.org