2015-03-11 21:37 GMT+01:00 Pascal Schumacher <pascalschumac...@gmx.net>:
> Am 11.03.2015 um 21:24 schrieb Benedikt Ritter: > > Is the groovy project aware that (to my knowledge) the coding has to > happen on ASF infrastructure? You won't be able to use the github web UI > for merging PRs for example, because currently the ASF only mirrors git > repositories from git.apache.org to github. > > Yes, we are aware of that. But as I understand we can still pull the > changes (from a pull request) to our local repo then merge/cherry-pick and > push to the ASF repo which will than be mirrored on github, right? > Yes, that's possible (and we're doing that at Commons Math), but it's far from the easy use of the web UI. Good that you're aware of this. OT: you can read more about GitHub/GitLab and the ASF at [1], if you like. B. [1] http://markmail.org/message/puvprtgzutdp2eph > > Regards, > Pascal > > > > I'm very excited about this project, and will definitively be on board > if groovy enters incubation. > > Benedikt > > 2015-03-11 21:11 GMT+01:00 Cédric Champeau <cedric.champ...@gmail.com>: > >> A good answer to this is to take a look at who actually contributed for >> the >> past 4 years: >> >> https://github.com/groovy/groovy-core/graphs/contributors?from=2011-01-01&to=2015-03-11&type=c >> and you will see that there are not so many regular contributors. GitHub >> helped us a lot recently to have more contributions, from simple typos to >> complex bug fixes, but one should not forget that a contribution in GitHub >> doesn't mean that the author is a committer : it's just that authors are >> preserved. >> >> While we have a lot of contributors, only a few of us have a deep >> knowledge >> of Groovy internals. We will certainly encourage regular contributors to >> become committers (we already think of some), as long as those are >> following quality standards, take care of important things like >> maintaining >> backwards compatibility etc... We had more than 5 committers in the past, >> but lots of them just stopped pushing code, for various reasons. In the >> end >> I would be the first pleased to see more committers, but meritocracy is >> also important. And to be clear, we do not think only about code: >> contributions like documentation or tests are also very important. >> >> 2015-03-11 20:17 GMT+01:00 Roman Shaposhnik <ro...@shaposhnik.org>: >> >> > On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 12:08 PM, jan i <j...@apache.org> wrote: >> > > Hi. >> > > >> > > Having just skimmed the proposal, that in general look good, one thing >> > > caught my eye. >> > > >> > > The proposal talks several places about a vibrant community and the >> > initial >> > > commiters are only 5. >> > >> > This, is a GREAT question! Thank you so much for raising it. While >> > preparing a proposal I've struggled with the same issue, because looking >> > at this: https://github.com/groovy/groovy-core/graphs/contributors >> makes >> > me wonder exactly the same thing. >> > >> > In the end, we decided to go ahead with the proposal the way it is and >> > position >> > the initial list of committers more as a PMC for the project. >> > >> > That still doesn't answer your (or mine! ;-)) question of what's the >> best >> > way >> > to make sure than anybody who feels like they have a stake in the >> project >> > and have contributed in the past get invited. >> > >> > There are a few alternatives I could see, but I would really >> > appreciate Incubator's >> > collective wisdom on what would be the best way to proceed here given >> > that Groovy is a very mature project with a lot of contributors in the >> > past. >> > Some of whom may or may not wish to keep contributing. >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Roman. >> > >> > > > > -- > http://people.apache.org/~britter/ > http://www.systemoutprintln.de/ > http://twitter.com/BenediktRitter > http://github.com/britter > > > -- http://people.apache.org/~britter/ http://www.systemoutprintln.de/ http://twitter.com/BenediktRitter http://github.com/britter
