ok I missed :( It doesn't make sense to have my repo as primary. I didn't create it and never committed to it. There is probably a bug in GitHub with forks which were created a long time ago
On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 1:58 PM Daniel Beck <[email protected]> wrote: > The repo exists, there's just an additional "jenkinsci/" in the link. I > have no idea why the GH API behaves inconsistently there. > > On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 1:50 PM Arnaud Héritier <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> +1 for the proposed plan >> Something is strange in your export. >> For example I am supposed to host >> https://github.com/aheritier/build-flow-plugin (origin) which should be >> forked to https://github.com/jenkinsci/jenkinsci/build-flow-plugin ( >> doesn't exist) >> We probably had such repo in the past and it was deleted after I forked >> it but maybe you could exclude from the list the repos when they aren't >> existing anymore in the jenkinsci side (not sure how many repos could be >> like this) >> >> On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 1:39 PM Daniel Beck <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi everyone, >>> >>> I'd like to propose a cleanup of 'fork' relationships of the >>> repositories in the jenkinsci GitHub organization. >>> >>> Background: >>> For many years, the plugin hosting process has forked existing >>> repositories. The expectation was always that the new repo in jenkinsci was >>> the canonical 'main' repository, but that wasn't enforced. For the past >>> year or two, we've even asked maintainers to delete their repository after >>> forking unless there were useful PRs and issues in there already, so that >>> the jenkinsci repo became the 'main' repo (with occasional mishaps if >>> someone else had forked before us). >>> >>> Some people enjoy the "branding" effect that having the source >>> repository creates. But this comes with downsides: Sometimes GitHub code >>> search doesn't work, depending on the popularity of the repository. Links >>> to create pull requests sometimes don't work quite right, and INFRA-2697 >>> notes that the GitHub CLI cannot really handle networks where a fork is the >>> "main" repo, probably for the same reason. Having a different repo than >>> what we consider canonical as the "root" repository confuses users trying >>> to file pull requests or issues on GitHub. It'll get worse once GitHub adds >>> repo-level discussions[1]. Basically, the more stuff is attached to a >>> repository that isn't trivially cloned/mirrored to forks, the worse it gets. >>> >>> In terms of security, GitHub for quite some time did not support >>> security warnings for forks. LGTM.com / GitHub Security Labs still does not >>> recognize forked repositories. Earlier this year a security researcher >>> recently used its CodeQL functionality to identify and submit fixes to >>> pom.xml files referencing plain HTTP Maven repositories, but couldn't do >>> that for forked repos. In many cases, the source repositories are much less >>> active than the repo in jenkinsci, or the maintainers have moved on >>> entirely, making this feature unavailable to (other) current maintainers, >>> or the Jenkins security team. >>> >>> The way we create forks is simply not a well-supported use case. >>> >>> My proposal therefore is to "unfork" plugin and similar repositories in >>> the jenkinsci organization. Only repositories that clearly are forks (e.g. >>> some libraries not maintained by us) would remain forks. >>> >>> After checking with GitHub support, the following options exist: >>> >>> 1. It is possible to invert the fork relationship. This requires >>> approval from both repo owners (i.e. jenkinsci and whoever we forked from). >>> 2. It is possible to cut the fork relationship. This requires approval >>> from the forked repo owner (i.e. jenkinsci). >>> >>> And while it is technically possible to re-attach repos to a network / >>> merge networks, GH support would rather not do that. >>> >>> Therefore I propose we implement the following steps: >>> >>> 1. We try to contact, wherever possible, whoever we forked from, and ask >>> them to contact GitHub support. I'll grant blanket permission on behalf of >>> jenkinsci and will tell everyone the support ticket number to reference so >>> this goes as smoothly as possible. >>> 2. We wait a while while folks ask GH support for an inversion of the >>> fork relationship. >>> 3. We ask GitHub support to cut the fork relationship of everything >>> that's left over. >>> >>> Additionally, we should change the hosting process to work with repo >>> transfers, or creation of repos without the fork relationship. That can be >>> done at any time though; as even now we don't really want that fork >>> relationship we create to exist. >>> >>> To understand the scope of this, I've written a script that periodically >>> updates a list of forked repositories in jenkinsci, you can see the result >>> at >>> https://www.jenkins.io/doc/developer/publishing/source-code-hosting/forks/ >>> >>> One potential problem are plugins that are actively maintained outside >>> the jenkinsci organization and only have an outdated fork in jenkinsci that >>> isn't being used. I think it makes sense to ask maintainers to move their >>> activity into jenkinsci (including perhaps a complete repo transfer to >>> retain issues and PRs). If they refuse, rather than cut the fork >>> relationship, we could just delete our unused fork. (While this touches on >>> plugins maintained exclusively outside jenkinsci, I consider that general >>> topic to be a separate conversation. Please keep this thread focused on >>> this proposal.) >>> >>> Thoughts? >>> >>> Daniel >>> >>> 1: >>> https://github.blog/2020-05-06-new-from-satellite-2020-github-codespaces-github-discussions-securing-code-in-private-repositories-and-more/#discussions >>> >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "Jenkins Developers" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to [email protected]. >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/6D96DA83-2AE0-4C87-92D6-4CCC8DFE1E57%40beckweb.net >>> . >>> >> >> >> -- >> Arnaud Héritier >> Twitter/Skype : aheritier >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Jenkins Developers" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAFNCU-_vuzGEO_u18SkF43t1vSbZouZm7yq61-m9BCvj3dizMg%40mail.gmail.com >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAFNCU-_vuzGEO_u18SkF43t1vSbZouZm7yq61-m9BCvj3dizMg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Jenkins Developers" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAMo7PtKTB1QCVTd-c1ABxBi3pf%2Bo8w-ODJu1Poq2vWjKX4Ot8g%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAMo7PtKTB1QCVTd-c1ABxBi3pf%2Bo8w-ODJu1Poq2vWjKX4Ot8g%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- Arnaud Héritier Twitter/Skype : aheritier -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAFNCU-9th%2B-9aezCgecy7MOSLu6O6cNBPBBsBSL8hht2Fc51nw%40mail.gmail.com.
