Many Many thanks Oliver, If/when we start using the Github repo, suggest we copy any key mails OR links to to the blue-obelisk discuss list.
It might make sense to see if we could shift blue-obelisk to NumFocus. This is a non-profit fiscal sponsor who can apply for funding . I have had dealing with them before - it turned out ContentMine wasn't eligible as it was already a company. If you look at the successful projects then Blue Obelisk would be (just) in scope for biosciences I think. On the other hand we've done fine with zero-cash for over 15 years! P. On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 1:40 PM Oliver Stueker <oliver.stue...@mun.ca> wrote: > Thanks everyone, > > Yes, maintaining history was always my plan. I have already (locally) > cloned all hg-repositories in question using git-remote-hg ( > https://github.com/felipec/git-remote-hg) and have them as git > repositories that contain the whole history. > I've been using git-remote-hg for quite a while now and it's working so > well that I never had to bother learning to work with hg directly. > > Thanks also for inviting me to BlueObelisk on GitHub. > > Most repositories are now ready to be pushed directly to GitHub once stubs > have been created there. > The jumbo-converters repo seems to contain at least one (zip) file that is > larger than 100M somewhere in its history (probably containing gaussian log > files) and pushing to GH is therefore rejected. I should be able to filter > them out. > > > Deprecating the old repositories and leaving a redirection to the new > location might be more difficult as this will require access to the wwmm > and cml accounts on Bitbucket. > Peter mentioned in our call that he doesn't remember the passwords for > them but that they are likely "user" accounts and not "Teams" where several > users could have "owner" or "manager" privileges. > @Mark: do you maybe remember more? > > In any case: the Mercurial repos will be deleted by Bitbucket on June 1, > 2020. > If we can't regain access to the Bitbucket hg-repositories, I can add a > statement to the README.md files of each repo that says, e.g.: > > NOTE: > As of Janurary 1st, 2020 https://github.com/BlueObelisk/jumbo-converters > is the new offical repository. > This repository was previously hosted at: > https://bitbucket.org/wwmm/jumbo-converters > > If someone still has at least push-access to the old repositories, we can > push this message there as well -- or once the hg-repos have been deleted, > create new repos at Bitbucket with the same name that just contain this > message. > However in my own Bitbucket repositories I don't see any functionality > that correspronds to GitHubs: "Archive this repository -- Mark this > repository as archived and read-only." > > Oliver > > On Tue, 17 Dec 2019 at 08:05, Mark Williamson <mw...@cam.ac.uk> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On 17/12/2019 02:06, Oliver Stueker wrote: >>> > Dear All (especially Egon and Henry), >>> > >>> > I'd really like to hear your opinion (in favor or against) adding >>> these >>> > WWMM and CML source-code repositories to >>> https://github.com/BlueObelisk. >>> >>> Hello Oliver, >>> >>> Sounds fine to me; just make sure that it is clear that the old repos >>> are deprecated and that there is some kind of forwarding message to the >>> new repos. Also, try to maintain history with something like hg-git in >>> migration. I'll try and help in any way, time permitting; my github id >>> is mjw99. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Mark >>> >> -- "I always retain copyright in my papers, and nothing in any contract I sign with any publisher will override that fact. You should do the same". Peter Murray-Rust Reader Emeritus in Molecular Informatics Unilever Centre, Dept. Of Chemistry University of Cambridge CB2 1EW, UK +44-1223-763069
_______________________________________________ Blueobelisk-discuss mailing list Blueobelisk-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/blueobelisk-discuss
