Never mind, the website is still in SVN and only the website portion of SVN is writable.
Brock On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 11:03 AM, Brock Noland <[email protected]> wrote: > I am not sure we finished this conversation? It sounds like the > definitive copy of the documentation is going to be in git. I will > operate under that assumption while updating the release documents. > > Brock > > On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 2:46 AM, Jarek Jarcec Cecho <[email protected]> wrote: >> I personally believe that this is the right way to go, so I'm definitely +1 >> on such proposal. >> >> Jarcec >> >> On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 09:02:27PM +0000, Wei, Jianbin wrote: >>> The key point here is to have documentation evolve along with source code. >>> >>> Given git is not going to be supported by the CMS, we may try the way >>> Jarcec used in Sqoop: get documentation into git, evolve, and then push >>> back to SVN for publish. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> -- Jianbin >>> >>> On Sep 7, 2012, at 9:55 AM, Brock Noland wrote: >>> >>> So is the proposal here to basically, take a snapshot of the >>> documentation when we branch for a release and include that in the >>> release? >>> >>> Brock >>> >>> On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 11:40 AM, Wei, Jianbin >>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> The ultimate purpose is to have documentation that is _updated_ and _nice_. >>> >>> Having documentation as part of release is one possible solution. For >>> example, when adding a new feature, the documentation, including design >>> (for other developers) and usage (for users), should be part of the >>> checkin. Right now, they are NOT although it is under SVN control. >>> >>> IMO, we can support one stable and one current releases. So I don't see >>> why we cannot fix typos or improving documentations between releases. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> -- Jianbin >>> >>> On Sep 7, 2012, at 5:54 AM, Jim Donofrio wrote: >>> >>> Our documentation is currently poor but we should maybe keep separate >>> documentation for different versions or highlight the differences between >>> the versions. I dont see a need to make a formal process of releasing >>> documentation with a release and tagging the documentation. The website is >>> already under version control in SVN. By versioning the documentation it >>> will prevent us from fixing typos or improving the documentation between >>> releases. >>> >>> On 09/07/2012 01:28 AM, Jarek Jarcec Cecho wrote: >>> The site folder currently can't be part of the GIT repository. The reason >>> behind that is that it's directly used by Apache CMS system and that is >>> heavily based on SVN without any GIT support (as far as I know). >>> >>> On the other hand, I'm in favour of of having documentation as a part of >>> the repository and release. We're for example doing something similar in >>> Apache Sqoop project, where the documentation is part of the repository and >>> is kept up-to-date with the sources. During release procedure of new >>> version we always take the snapshot and publish it to the web (through site >>> SVN module). But as far as I know, we've never done something similar in >>> MRunit, so this topic is out of scope of "Moving repository to git" :-) But >>> please, feel free to send your suggestion in separate mail thread for >>> brother discussion. >>> >>> Jarcec >>> >>> On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 03:45:58AM +0000, Wei, Jianbin wrote: >>> Why not make the site folder as part of the repository? The documentation >>> should be part of the release. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Jianbin >>> >>> On Sep 6, 2012, at 17:59, "Jim Donofrio" >>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Looks good, make sure INFRA keeps the site folder in the svn writable, >>> otherwise we cannot update the website. >>> >>> On 09/06/2012 01:00 PM, Brock Noland wrote: >>> Nice! Seems OK to me (git log and git branch -a), but I am no git >>> ninja so let's have one more person comment before we go ahead. >>> >>> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 11:55 AM, Jarek Jarcec Cecho >>> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>> >>> wrote: >>> Hi Guys, >>> Infra team has rebuilt new GIT repository. I've verified that the missing >>> commits are back. I would strongly prefer to have another set of eyes check >>> the repository before allowing infra to continue. >>> >>> You can clone the repository using following command: >>> >>> git clone https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/mrunit.git >>> >>> Jarcec >>> >>> On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 07:26:41AM +0200, Jarek Jarcec Cecho wrote: >>> This is my fault - INRA asked for PMC approval, so I've automatically >>> routed this event to private@ mailing list. I'll send next around to dev@. >>> >>> Jarcec >>> >>> On Mon, Sep 03, 2012 at 04:01:38PM -0400, Jim Donofrio wrote: >>> Yes good point. >>> >>> On 09/03/2012 03:57 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) wrote: >>> Hi Guys, >>> >>> Why is this happening on private? Looks like a dev@ convo to me. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Chris >>> >>> On Sep 3, 2012, at 12:55 PM, Jim Donofrio wrote: >>> >>> The trunk branch seems to be way out of date. The last commit should be >>> MRUNIT-142 by Dave Beech at 8/15 6:23am while the git repo shows the last >>> commit as being me on 5/22? >>> >>> On 09/03/2012 01:50 AM, Jarek Jarcec Cecho wrote: >>> Hi Mrunit PMC, >>> it appears that we have progress on moving our repository from SVN to GIT. >>> Infra has set our SVN repository to read only and imported data to git. You >>> can get the repository by running following command: >>> >>> git clone https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/mrunit.git >>> >>> We are asked to check the repository for correctness. I've checked it >>> myself, however I would appreciate if another set of eyes would look around >>> as well before giving Infra green to proceed. >>> >>> Here is stuff that I've checked: >>> >>> * Clone is working >>> * Tags seems to be correct >>> * Branches seems to be correct >>> * Commit history (git graph) seems to be also correct >>> * "trunk" is compilable >>> >>> Jarcec >>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. >>> Senior Computer Scientist >>> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA >>> Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246 >>> Email: >>> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]> >>> WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ >>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department >>> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA >>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Apache MRUnit - Unit testing MapReduce - http://incubator.apache.org/mrunit/ >>> > > > > -- > Apache MRUnit - Unit testing MapReduce - http://incubator.apache.org/mrunit/ -- Apache MRUnit - Unit testing MapReduce - http://incubator.apache.org/mrunit/
