Send Motion-user mailing list submissions to
[email protected]
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/motion-user
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
[email protected]
You can reach the person managing the list at
[email protected]
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Motion-user digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Project Status (Kenneth Lavrsen)
2. Re: Project Status (Dave Howorth)
3. Re: Project Status (Kenneth Lavrsen)
4. Re: Project Status (Joseph Heenan)
5. Re: Project Status (Mr Dave)
6. Re: Project Status (Joseph Heenan)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2016 18:23:26 +0200
From: Kenneth Lavrsen <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Motion-user] Project Status
To: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
The wiki points to the new GitHub now.
Kenneth
On 08-Aug-16 02:22, Mr Dave wrote:
> I just wanted to send a note with the plan and status as of now.
>
> The code repo has been moved over to the new location.
> https://github.com/Motion-Project/motion If you linked to my old repo,
> you'll now be redirected to here.
>
> I know that there is a lot of pent up demand for fixes and features but
> I'd ask that issues be opened on the repo so that we can track and
> manage them accordingly. As demonstrated over these last few days,
> keeping track of issues via the mailing list can be challenging.
>
> We'll be working on the overall transition items as a first priority,
> followed closely by doing the work necessary to get a updated release to
> the distributors. We can then assess the issues reported to determine a
> plan for addressing them. And to be clear, the documentation updates
> fall within the transition process.
>
> For anyone considering a pull, the current flow (which may evolve later)
> is Pull request -> Unstable -> Master -> Release This roughly follows
> the process used by Debian which helps facilitate getting error free
> releases.
>
> I will also be checking in on the IRC channel for discussion during the
> US MT evening hours.
>
> Dave
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Motion-user mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/motion-user
> http://www.lavrsen.dk/twiki/bin/view/Motion/WebHome
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2016 21:23:27 +0100
From: Dave Howorth <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Motion-user] Project Status
To: Motion discussion list <[email protected]>
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
On Mon, 2016-08-08 at 18:23 +0200, Kenneth Lavrsen wrote:
> The wiki points to the new GitHub now.
I'm an innocent motion user. I'm a little confused. I use Mr Dave's
release because it works but I would prefer to use releases via my
distros (openSUSE & Raspbian). Are there changes that will allow
openSUSE & Raspbian to pick up Mr Dave's release?
I also fully sympathise with the desire that there should be good
documentation (user-friendly, complete & up-to-date) since I have
suffered to a minor extent from the lack of documentation and confusion
that has been current in the recent past.
I fully agree that an easy to use daemon that simply recognizes motion
is the main priority. Filtering out sunlight changes would be a much
higher priority than any kind of web services to my mind.
FWIW I may have some time to devote to the documentation next year.
Cheers, Dave
> Kenneth
>
>
> On 08-Aug-16 02:22, Mr Dave wrote:
> > I just wanted to send a note with the plan and status as of now.
> >
> > The code repo has been moved over to the new location.
> > https://github.com/Motion-Project/motion If you linked to my old repo,
> > you'll now be redirected to here.
> >
> > I know that there is a lot of pent up demand for fixes and features but
> > I'd ask that issues be opened on the repo so that we can track and
> > manage them accordingly. As demonstrated over these last few days,
> > keeping track of issues via the mailing list can be challenging.
> >
> > We'll be working on the overall transition items as a first priority,
> > followed closely by doing the work necessary to get a updated release to
> > the distributors. We can then assess the issues reported to determine a
> > plan for addressing them. And to be clear, the documentation updates
> > fall within the transition process.
> >
> > For anyone considering a pull, the current flow (which may evolve later)
> > is Pull request -> Unstable -> Master -> Release This roughly follows
> > the process used by Debian which helps facilitate getting error free
> > releases.
> >
> > I will also be checking in on the IRC channel for discussion during the
> > US MT evening hours.
> >
> > Dave
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > _______________________________________________
> > Motion-user mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/motion-user
> > http://www.lavrsen.dk/twiki/bin/view/Motion/WebHome
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> What NetFlow Analyzer can do for you? Monitors network bandwidth and traffic
> patterns at an interface-level. Reveals which users, apps, and protocols are
> consuming the most bandwidth. Provides multi-vendor support for NetFlow,
> J-Flow, sFlow and other flows. Make informed decisions using capacity
> planning reports. http://sdm.link/zohodev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Motion-user mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/motion-user
> http://www.lavrsen.dk/twiki/bin/view/Motion/WebHome
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2016 00:09:07 +0200
From: Kenneth Lavrsen <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Motion-user] Project Status
To: [email protected], Motion discussion list
<[email protected]>
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Dave
Yes. Dr Dave is now the new proud owner of the project and the official
releases in the new Github are based on his good work. Future debs and rpms for
the various distros will be released from this new official Github repo and it
is my impression that Dave is pushing for a new official release asap.
It is all going to be a revival of the project. I will still contribute help
with documentation and help when I have time with questions etc. But the
project will no longer be held back by my lack of time. And I feel really good
about that. You all have something good to look forward to
Kenneth
> On 08 Aug 2016, at 22:23, Dave Howorth <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 2016-08-08 at 18:23 +0200, Kenneth Lavrsen wrote:
>> The wiki points to the new GitHub now.
>
> I'm an innocent motion user. I'm a little confused. I use Mr Dave's
> release because it works but I would prefer to use releases via my
> distros (openSUSE & Raspbian). Are there changes that will allow
> openSUSE & Raspbian to pick up Mr Dave's release?
>
> I also fully sympathise with the desire that there should be good
> documentation (user-friendly, complete & up-to-date) since I have
> suffered to a minor extent from the lack of documentation and confusion
> that has been current in the recent past.
>
> I fully agree that an easy to use daemon that simply recognizes motion
> is the main priority. Filtering out sunlight changes would be a much
> higher priority than any kind of web services to my mind.
>
> FWIW I may have some time to devote to the documentation next year.
>
> Cheers, Dave
>
>> Kenneth
>>
>>
>>> On 08-Aug-16 02:22, Mr Dave wrote:
>>> I just wanted to send a note with the plan and status as of now.
>>>
>>> The code repo has been moved over to the new location.
>>> https://github.com/Motion-Project/motion If you linked to my old repo,
>>> you'll now be redirected to here.
>>>
>>> I know that there is a lot of pent up demand for fixes and features but
>>> I'd ask that issues be opened on the repo so that we can track and
>>> manage them accordingly. As demonstrated over these last few days,
>>> keeping track of issues via the mailing list can be challenging.
>>>
>>> We'll be working on the overall transition items as a first priority,
>>> followed closely by doing the work necessary to get a updated release to
>>> the distributors. We can then assess the issues reported to determine a
>>> plan for addressing them. And to be clear, the documentation updates
>>> fall within the transition process.
>>>
>>> For anyone considering a pull, the current flow (which may evolve later)
>>> is Pull request -> Unstable -> Master -> Release This roughly follows
>>> the process used by Debian which helps facilitate getting error free
>>> releases.
>>>
>>> I will also be checking in on the IRC channel for discussion during the
>>> US MT evening hours.
>>>
>>> Dave
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Motion-user mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/motion-user
>>> http://www.lavrsen.dk/twiki/bin/view/Motion/WebHome
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> What NetFlow Analyzer can do for you? Monitors network bandwidth and traffic
>> patterns at an interface-level. Reveals which users, apps, and protocols are
>> consuming the most bandwidth. Provides multi-vendor support for NetFlow,
>> J-Flow, sFlow and other flows. Make informed decisions using capacity
>> planning reports. http://sdm.link/zohodev2dev
>> _______________________________________________
>> Motion-user mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/motion-user
>> http://www.lavrsen.dk/twiki/bin/view/Motion/WebHome
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> What NetFlow Analyzer can do for you? Monitors network bandwidth and traffic
> patterns at an interface-level. Reveals which users, apps, and protocols are
> consuming the most bandwidth. Provides multi-vendor support for NetFlow,
> J-Flow, sFlow and other flows. Make informed decisions using capacity
> planning reports. http://sdm.link/zohodev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Motion-user mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/motion-user
> http://www.lavrsen.dk/twiki/bin/view/Motion/WebHome
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2016 09:05:37 +0100
From: Joseph Heenan <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Motion-user] Project Status
To: Motion discussion list <[email protected]>
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Hi MrDave,
> On 8 Aug 2016, at 01:22, Mr Dave <[email protected]> wrote:
> For anyone considering a pull, the current flow (which may evolve later)
> is Pull request -> Unstable -> Master -> Release This roughly follows
> the process used by Debian which helps facilitate getting error free
> releases.
I?ve never come across this particular git branch workflow before (I?ve never
worked on a Debian git repo, so that might be why) - I?ve tried googling to
find a reference but I?ve failed. Is there a description anywhere you can point
us at please?
Thanks
Joseph
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2016 07:18:01 -0600
From: Mr Dave <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Motion-user] Project Status
To: [email protected]
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Ok. Lets find time to discuss perhaps on the developer list or on IRC
if we can find a common time across the timezones. I'd agree that I
haven't seen this in git but the majority of the projects I've looked at
do not accept pull requests. The description of the structure/flow that
I am referring to can be found here.
https://debian-handbook.info/browse/stable/sect.release-lifecycle.html
While this is talking about packages, the same concepts should be able
to be applied to the code base.
Dave
On 8/9/2016 2:05 AM, Joseph Heenan wrote:
> Hi MrDave,
>
>> On 8 Aug 2016, at 01:22, Mr Dave <[email protected]> wrote:
>> For anyone considering a pull, the current flow (which may evolve later)
>> is Pull request -> Unstable -> Master -> Release This roughly follows
>> the process used by Debian which helps facilitate getting error free
>> releases.
> I?ve never come across this particular git branch workflow before (I?ve never
> worked on a Debian git repo, so that might be why) - I?ve tried googling to
> find a reference but I?ve failed. Is there a description anywhere you can
> point us at please?
>
> Thanks
>
> Joseph
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> What NetFlow Analyzer can do for you? Monitors network bandwidth and traffic
> patterns at an interface-level. Reveals which users, apps, and protocols are
> consuming the most bandwidth. Provides multi-vendor support for NetFlow,
> J-Flow, sFlow and other flows. Make informed decisions using capacity
> planning reports. http://sdm.link/zohodev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Motion-user mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/motion-user
> http://www.lavrsen.dk/twiki/bin/view/Motion/WebHome
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Tue, 9 Aug 2016 22:30:18 +0100
From: Joseph Heenan <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Motion-user] Project Status
To: Motion discussion list <[email protected]>
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Hi MrDave,
> On 9 Aug 2016, at 14:18, Mr Dave <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Ok. Lets find time to discuss perhaps on the developer list or on IRC
> if we can find a common time across the timezones.
I can probably manage to make an pre-arranged IRC meeting 7AM - 10PM or so
(GMT+1). (I don't tend to 'hang out' on IRC much though.)
> I'd agree that I haven't seen this in git but the majority of the projects
> I've looked at
> do not accept pull requests.
I'd probably see it the other way; the majority of projects aren't interesting
enough to have people submitting pull requests to them :-)
Here's a few projects that do that I'm aware of; at random:
https://github.com/pokeb/asi-http-request
https://github.com/CocoaPods/CocoaPods
https://github.com/robbiehanson/CocoaAsyncSocket
https://github.com/CocoaLumberjack/CocoaLumberjack
(No prizes for guessing that I do a reasonable amount of iOS development too...
)
> The description of the structure/flow that
> I am referring to can be found here.
>
> https://debian-handbook.info/browse/stable/sect.release-lifecycle.html
>
> While this is talking about packages, the same concepts should be able
> to be applied to the code base.
Ah, yes, that I have come across, thanks I would say it is good model for
solving the very large scale problems of 25,000 interdependent packages being
changed by 1,000 different people.
The closest git workflow I've seen described would be this one (and various
not-that-different variants on it):
http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/
(I think your "unstable" matches his "develop" to some extent.)
I think it's more suited to frontend projects, and even there it's kind of
heavy weight in my opinion - if for no other reason than a branch model that
takes 12 pages to explain isn't good for encouraging new comers to a project :-)
To try to concisely explain some of my thinking on branch models:
I'm very much a fan of very lightweight models with minimal merging. (Merges,
when they conflict, are horrible manual error prone things.
http://www.dwheeler.com/essays/apple-goto-fail.html is a great example of a
massive security flaw that a lot of people attribute to a bad resolution of a
merge conflict. Code review processes almost always turn a blind eye to merge
conflict resolution. git is very good at merges, far better than svn ever was,
but you still get conflicts.)
master is very much the "default" git branch, and I believe it should normally
contain the code we expect a developer on the project to work on top of and to
submit pull requests to. (IMHO It's pretty well known that if you want
something stable, look for a release instead.)
Conversely, in my opinion, master should always be viewed as "shippable after a
bit of a test". So you never put anything onto master unless you're relatively
sure it's okay to go into a release without further changes. (If you have
something less stable than that, a topic/feature specific branch can be used.
You never want to have multiple different types of instability/unfinished code
on the same branch, as that makes it near impossible to finish and ship one of
the features without fixing or trying to remove all the others.)
Release branches should be taken from master once (almost) everything needed
for the release has been committed to master, and then the release branch only
gets minimal 100% necessary changes. Release branches are either merged or
cherrypicked back to master (or release branch commits are cherrypicked from
master) - either works.
Hopefully the above doesn't sound too much like I'm on a soapbox. :)
Cheers,
Joseph
------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What NetFlow Analyzer can do for you? Monitors network bandwidth and traffic
patterns at an interface-level. Reveals which users, apps, and protocols are
consuming the most bandwidth. Provides multi-vendor support for NetFlow,
J-Flow, sFlow and other flows. Make informed decisions using capacity
planning reports. http://sdm.link/zohodev2dev
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Motion-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/motion-user
End of Motion-user Digest, Vol 123, Issue 28
********************************************
