Re: Feedback on Flex board report
Lewis, did you or anyone else feel that you were pushed to git? While your story has a bit of @infra-specific business to it, the majority of it and flex's seem to be composed of 'we heard that git was cool, so we moved to it, and we stepped on a rake.' Personally, I wouldn't recommend that any community, Apache or otherwise, move to git unless it contained several people who were already experienced in managing a project of similar complexity in git. I'd say the same thing about Maven. Or any number of other tools. I don't see this as having much to do with git in particular. Anything that is simultaneously so basic to project operations as the SCM, and as complex as git, or svn, or Maven, or any number of other things, is going to take significant learning, and the benefits, if any, only come after the learning. On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 1:06 PM, Lewis John Mcgibbney < lewis.mcgibb...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > (removed board@ and dev@flex from my reply) > I've watched this thread with a keen sense of interest. > I would like to point out that we (the Any23 community) have more or less > experienced the exact same as the flex guys. > The build was broken as git binaries are not available on solaris slaves > for nightly builds. There was confusion about what code we move to git. We > are now in a situation where the Any23 site is writable (the rest read > only) within SVN and our trunk code, KEYS file etc is writable and lives in > git. > The release process stalled until we fixed the maven pom's. > > I feel that it is necessary and therefore justified to let others know > about what needs to be considered when the migration is taking place. > > In our situation, its really, really stalled our development of the Any23 > library. Ironically, our intent (behind the move to git) was to build the > community as more people seemed comfortable with git. This so far has > proved fruitless as its taken us way to long to sort out the above. Which > is a real shame and pretty frustrating. > > Lewis > > On Saturday, April 27, 2013, Ross Gardler > wrote: > > Let me repeat again that the value I see in the Flex report is that it > identifies some issues that projects moving to git should consider and plan > for. This will make other projects migrations smoother. > > > > Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity > > > > On 26 Apr 2013 18:35, "Luciano Resende" wrote: > >> > >> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 2:17 AM, Ross Gardler < > rgard...@opendirective.com> > wrote: > >>> > >>> I just wanted to thank you for the feedback you provided in your last > >>> board report with respect to your experiences with moving to Git. This > >>> kind of information is really useful to those in other projects. For > >>> the benefit of the archives (and ComDev PMC) I've copied the relevant > >>> section at the end of this mail. > >>> > >>> I'd really like to see this documented in the ComDev project. Perhaps > >>> in the section "For Commtters/PMCs". This could form the start of a > >>> page on best practices for version control which would link out to > >>> appropriate documentation on Git and SVN workflows, review processes > >>> etc. > >>> > >>> If anyone in the Flex community can write up your experiences as > >>> documentation on that site (it is editable by all committers) we'd > >>> really appreciate it.Note, the ComDev site is intended to "signpost" > >>> into more detailed documentation. The idea is not to be fully detailed > >>> but to provide a high level overview linking out to the details. To > >>> this end the content in the board report is at about the right level > >>> for the ComDev site, it just needs a little context padding for the > >>> ComDev site. If you have process documents on your own project pages > >>> please feel free to link to them as appropriate. > >>> > >>> If someone does find the time - thank you in advance. If not, then > >>> thank you for including it in the board report. Hopefully I or another > >>> ComDev memver will find the time to move it into the ComDev site. > >>> > >>> Ross > >>> > >>> Relevant section from board report: > >>> > >>> We moved our code base from SVN to Git in mid-March. It has been a > much > >>> more difficult transition than expected. Three weeks later, folks are > still > >>> confused about how to use Git as it has many options for performing > tasks > >>> that can have significant implications. Git's database model is not > suited > >>> for partial checkouts like SVN, making the management of our > "whiteboard" (a > >>> playground for committers) much more difficult as you have to download > the > >>> entire whiteboard (currently 245MB) first. There is discussion of > managing > >>> the whiteboard on GitHub, but others feel that it doesn't conform to > the > >>> Apache way. > >>> > >>> The move to Git has slowed contributions from some committers as folks > >>> aren't sure they have the time to learn to use Git and are afraid of > using > >>> the w
Feedback on Flex board report
Hi, (removed board@ and dev@flex from my reply) I've watched this thread with a keen sense of interest. I would like to point out that we (the Any23 community) have more or less experienced the exact same as the flex guys. The build was broken as git binaries are not available on solaris slaves for nightly builds. There was confusion about what code we move to git. We are now in a situation where the Any23 site is writable (the rest read only) within SVN and our trunk code, KEYS file etc is writable and lives in git. The release process stalled until we fixed the maven pom's. I feel that it is necessary and therefore justified to let others know about what needs to be considered when the migration is taking place. In our situation, its really, really stalled our development of the Any23 library. Ironically, our intent (behind the move to git) was to build the community as more people seemed comfortable with git. This so far has proved fruitless as its taken us way to long to sort out the above. Which is a real shame and pretty frustrating. Lewis On Saturday, April 27, 2013, Ross Gardler wrote: > Let me repeat again that the value I see in the Flex report is that it identifies some issues that projects moving to git should consider and plan for. This will make other projects migrations smoother. > > Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity > > On 26 Apr 2013 18:35, "Luciano Resende" wrote: >> >> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 2:17 AM, Ross Gardler wrote: >>> >>> I just wanted to thank you for the feedback you provided in your last >>> board report with respect to your experiences with moving to Git. This >>> kind of information is really useful to those in other projects. For >>> the benefit of the archives (and ComDev PMC) I've copied the relevant >>> section at the end of this mail. >>> >>> I'd really like to see this documented in the ComDev project. Perhaps >>> in the section "For Commtters/PMCs". This could form the start of a >>> page on best practices for version control which would link out to >>> appropriate documentation on Git and SVN workflows, review processes >>> etc. >>> >>> If anyone in the Flex community can write up your experiences as >>> documentation on that site (it is editable by all committers) we'd >>> really appreciate it.Note, the ComDev site is intended to "signpost" >>> into more detailed documentation. The idea is not to be fully detailed >>> but to provide a high level overview linking out to the details. To >>> this end the content in the board report is at about the right level >>> for the ComDev site, it just needs a little context padding for the >>> ComDev site. If you have process documents on your own project pages >>> please feel free to link to them as appropriate. >>> >>> If someone does find the time - thank you in advance. If not, then >>> thank you for including it in the board report. Hopefully I or another >>> ComDev memver will find the time to move it into the ComDev site. >>> >>> Ross >>> >>> Relevant section from board report: >>> >>> We moved our code base from SVN to Git in mid-March. It has been a much >>> more difficult transition than expected. Three weeks later, folks are still >>> confused about how to use Git as it has many options for performing tasks >>> that can have significant implications. Git's database model is not suited >>> for partial checkouts like SVN, making the management of our "whiteboard" (a >>> playground for committers) much more difficult as you have to download the >>> entire whiteboard (currently 245MB) first. There is discussion of managing >>> the whiteboard on GitHub, but others feel that it doesn't conform to the >>> Apache way. >>> >>> The move to Git has slowed contributions from some committers as folks >>> aren't sure they have the time to learn to use Git and are afraid of using >>> the wrong options. Hopefully, the net benefit promised by the Git >>> supporters will eventually be realized. >>> >>> The move to Git has also broken our release and build scripts and we are in >>> the process of fixing them. We also need to get the Git mirrors working >>> again, as well as our CI implementation. >>> >>> >>> >>> Ross Gardler (@rgardler) >>> Programme Leader (Open Development) >>> OpenDirective http://opendirective.com >> >> >> -1 for using Apache Flex's bad experience, as a concrete example, as this might give the wrong perception about Git at Apache. >> +1 for documenting most used git and svn workflows used in Apache Projects, this might avoid similar problems in the future. >> >> >> -- >> Luciano Resende >> http://people.apache.org/~lresende >> http://twitter.com/lresende1975 >> http://lresende.blogspot.com/ -- *Lewis*
Re: Feedback on Flex board report
Ross, agreed. A list of potential "gotchas" would be sensible! On 27 April 2013 17:26, Ross Gardler wrote: > Let me repeat again that the value I see in the Flex report is that it > identifies some issues that projects moving to git should consider and plan > for. This will make other projects migrations smoother. > > Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity > On 26 Apr 2013 18:35, "Luciano Resende" wrote: > >> >> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 2:17 AM, Ross Gardler > > wrote: >> >>> I just wanted to thank you for the feedback you provided in your last >>> board report with respect to your experiences with moving to Git. This >>> kind of information is really useful to those in other projects. For >>> the benefit of the archives (and ComDev PMC) I've copied the relevant >>> section at the end of this mail. >>> >>> I'd really like to see this documented in the ComDev project. Perhaps >>> in the section "For Commtters/PMCs". This could form the start of a >>> page on best practices for version control which would link out to >>> appropriate documentation on Git and SVN workflows, review processes >>> etc. >>> >>> If anyone in the Flex community can write up your experiences as >>> documentation on that site (it is editable by all committers) we'd >>> really appreciate it.Note, the ComDev site is intended to "signpost" >>> into more detailed documentation. The idea is not to be fully detailed >>> but to provide a high level overview linking out to the details. To >>> this end the content in the board report is at about the right level >>> for the ComDev site, it just needs a little context padding for the >>> ComDev site. If you have process documents on your own project pages >>> please feel free to link to them as appropriate. >>> >>> If someone does find the time - thank you in advance. If not, then >>> thank you for including it in the board report. Hopefully I or another >>> ComDev memver will find the time to move it into the ComDev site. >>> >>> Ross >>> >>> Relevant section from board report: >>> >>> We moved our code base from SVN to Git in mid-March. It has been a much >>> more difficult transition than expected. Three weeks later, folks are >>> still >>> confused about how to use Git as it has many options for performing tasks >>> that can have significant implications. Git's database model is not >>> suited >>> for partial checkouts like SVN, making the management of our >>> "whiteboard" (a >>> playground for committers) much more difficult as you have to download >>> the >>> entire whiteboard (currently 245MB) first. There is discussion of >>> managing >>> the whiteboard on GitHub, but others feel that it doesn't conform to the >>> Apache way. >>> >>> The move to Git has slowed contributions from some committers as folks >>> aren't sure they have the time to learn to use Git and are afraid of >>> using >>> the wrong options. Hopefully, the net benefit promised by the Git >>> supporters will eventually be realized. >>> >>> The move to Git has also broken our release and build scripts and we are >>> in >>> the process of fixing them. We also need to get the Git mirrors working >>> again, as well as our CI implementation. >>> >>> >>> >>> Ross Gardler (@rgardler) >>> Programme Leader (Open Development) >>> OpenDirective http://opendirective.com >>> >> >> >> -1 for using Apache Flex's bad experience, as a concrete example, as this >> might give the wrong perception about Git at Apache. >> >> +1 for documenting most used git and svn workflows used in Apache >> Projects, this might avoid similar problems in the future. >> >> >> -- >> Luciano Resende >> http://people.apache.org/~lresende >> http://twitter.com/lresende1975 >> http://lresende.blogspot.com/ >> > -- NS
Re: Feedback on Flex board report
Let me repeat again that the value I see in the Flex report is that it identifies some issues that projects moving to git should consider and plan for. This will make other projects migrations smoother. Sent from a mobile device, please excuse mistakes and brevity On 26 Apr 2013 18:35, "Luciano Resende" wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 2:17 AM, Ross Gardler > wrote: > >> I just wanted to thank you for the feedback you provided in your last >> board report with respect to your experiences with moving to Git. This >> kind of information is really useful to those in other projects. For >> the benefit of the archives (and ComDev PMC) I've copied the relevant >> section at the end of this mail. >> >> I'd really like to see this documented in the ComDev project. Perhaps >> in the section "For Commtters/PMCs". This could form the start of a >> page on best practices for version control which would link out to >> appropriate documentation on Git and SVN workflows, review processes >> etc. >> >> If anyone in the Flex community can write up your experiences as >> documentation on that site (it is editable by all committers) we'd >> really appreciate it.Note, the ComDev site is intended to "signpost" >> into more detailed documentation. The idea is not to be fully detailed >> but to provide a high level overview linking out to the details. To >> this end the content in the board report is at about the right level >> for the ComDev site, it just needs a little context padding for the >> ComDev site. If you have process documents on your own project pages >> please feel free to link to them as appropriate. >> >> If someone does find the time - thank you in advance. If not, then >> thank you for including it in the board report. Hopefully I or another >> ComDev memver will find the time to move it into the ComDev site. >> >> Ross >> >> Relevant section from board report: >> >> We moved our code base from SVN to Git in mid-March. It has been a much >> more difficult transition than expected. Three weeks later, folks are >> still >> confused about how to use Git as it has many options for performing tasks >> that can have significant implications. Git's database model is not >> suited >> for partial checkouts like SVN, making the management of our "whiteboard" >> (a >> playground for committers) much more difficult as you have to download the >> entire whiteboard (currently 245MB) first. There is discussion of >> managing >> the whiteboard on GitHub, but others feel that it doesn't conform to the >> Apache way. >> >> The move to Git has slowed contributions from some committers as folks >> aren't sure they have the time to learn to use Git and are afraid of using >> the wrong options. Hopefully, the net benefit promised by the Git >> supporters will eventually be realized. >> >> The move to Git has also broken our release and build scripts and we are >> in >> the process of fixing them. We also need to get the Git mirrors working >> again, as well as our CI implementation. >> >> >> >> Ross Gardler (@rgardler) >> Programme Leader (Open Development) >> OpenDirective http://opendirective.com >> > > > -1 for using Apache Flex's bad experience, as a concrete example, as this > might give the wrong perception about Git at Apache. > > +1 for documenting most used git and svn workflows used in Apache > Projects, this might avoid similar problems in the future. > > > -- > Luciano Resende > http://people.apache.org/~lresende > http://twitter.com/lresende1975 > http://lresende.blogspot.com/ >
Re: Feedback on Flex board report
I interpreted Luciano's -1 as a general "I am not in favour of this proposal", which seems like a perfectly valid use. Even if it were being cast _as_ a veto on some code change or other, I still think it would be valid, as it comes with justification. (That other people might disagree with that justification is neither here or there in terms of the efficacy of the veto.) On 27 April 2013 11:55, Daniel Shahaf wrote: > Luciano Resende wrote on Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 10:34:39 -0700: > > -1 for using Apache Flex's bad experience, as a concrete example, as this > > might give the wrong perception about Git at Apache. > > Sorry, invalid veto. You can't veto people from citing a datapoint > because it's not favourable to one side of the discussion. > -- NS
Re: Feedback on Flex board report
Luciano Resende wrote on Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 10:34:39 -0700: > -1 for using Apache Flex's bad experience, as a concrete example, as this > might give the wrong perception about Git at Apache. Sorry, invalid veto. You can't veto people from citing a datapoint because it's not favourable to one side of the discussion.
Re: Feedback on Flex board report
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 2:17 AM, Ross Gardler wrote: > I just wanted to thank you for the feedback you provided in your last > board report with respect to your experiences with moving to Git. This > kind of information is really useful to those in other projects. For > the benefit of the archives (and ComDev PMC) I've copied the relevant > section at the end of this mail. > > I'd really like to see this documented in the ComDev project. Perhaps > in the section "For Commtters/PMCs". This could form the start of a > page on best practices for version control which would link out to > appropriate documentation on Git and SVN workflows, review processes > etc. > > If anyone in the Flex community can write up your experiences as > documentation on that site (it is editable by all committers) we'd > really appreciate it.Note, the ComDev site is intended to "signpost" > into more detailed documentation. The idea is not to be fully detailed > but to provide a high level overview linking out to the details. To > this end the content in the board report is at about the right level > for the ComDev site, it just needs a little context padding for the > ComDev site. If you have process documents on your own project pages > please feel free to link to them as appropriate. > > If someone does find the time - thank you in advance. If not, then > thank you for including it in the board report. Hopefully I or another > ComDev memver will find the time to move it into the ComDev site. > > Ross > > Relevant section from board report: > > We moved our code base from SVN to Git in mid-March. It has been a much > more difficult transition than expected. Three weeks later, folks are > still > confused about how to use Git as it has many options for performing tasks > that can have significant implications. Git's database model is not suited > for partial checkouts like SVN, making the management of our "whiteboard" > (a > playground for committers) much more difficult as you have to download the > entire whiteboard (currently 245MB) first. There is discussion of managing > the whiteboard on GitHub, but others feel that it doesn't conform to the > Apache way. > > The move to Git has slowed contributions from some committers as folks > aren't sure they have the time to learn to use Git and are afraid of using > the wrong options. Hopefully, the net benefit promised by the Git > supporters will eventually be realized. > > The move to Git has also broken our release and build scripts and we are in > the process of fixing them. We also need to get the Git mirrors working > again, as well as our CI implementation. > > > > Ross Gardler (@rgardler) > Programme Leader (Open Development) > OpenDirective http://opendirective.com > -1 for using Apache Flex's bad experience, as a concrete example, as this might give the wrong perception about Git at Apache. +1 for documenting most used git and svn workflows used in Apache Projects, this might avoid similar problems in the future. -- Luciano Resende http://people.apache.org/~lresende http://twitter.com/lresende1975 http://lresende.blogspot.com/
Re: Feedback on Flex board report
On 26 April 2013 18:18, Alex Harui wrote: > It is true that there is less negativity about git every day in the Flex > community. I doubt we will go back to SVN. > > I'm not sure it is worth blogging it. The draft of the report is captured > on the dev@flex.a.o archives so it is public and searchable. > > -- > Alex Harui > Flex SDK Team > Adobe Systems, Inc. > http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui Hi Alex, I'm sorry to hear there were issues, but I can understand how git is very confusing at first (and sometimes later on too). I think broadly for CouchDB, it's been a success with very little real-world issues. I'd love to hear what didn't work and see if collectively we can put together some useful information that helps people & projects in future -- let me know where & how we could do this if you're interested. A+ Dave
Re: Feedback on Flex board report
On 4/26/13 2:41 AM, "Bertrand Delacretaz" wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 11:17 AM, Ross Gardler
> wrote:
>> I just wanted to thank you for the feedback you provided in your last
>> board report with respect to your experiences with moving to Git. This
>> kind of information is really useful to those in other projects...
>
> Note that the Flex team's view on Git as they reported it is fairly
> negative - this is totally understandable considering the history of
> how and when the move happened in that project, but other Apache
> projects are not seeing those issues at all.
>
> I suspect this negative view will evolve over time - either the
> project will revert to svn or they will be happy with Git after
> finding their groove. With this in mind, it would be better to post
> that information to http://blogs.apache.org/flex/ as something that's
> valid at this point in time ("where we are with Git today"), and maybe
> just add the essential, more durable information and links to the
> comdev website.
>
> -Bertrand
It is true that there is less negativity about git every day in the Flex
community. I doubt we will go back to SVN.
I'm not sure it is worth blogging it. The draft of the report is captured
on the dev@flex.a.o archives so it is public and searchable.
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
Re: Feedback on Flex board report
Yes, good point Bertrand. Me being a glass half full kind of person I
read the original content as positive in the sense it provided
valuable forewarning for those planning on moving to Git. I was hoping
that we could express it as "this is what you should plan for if you
choose to switch to Git", we certainly don't want Git vs SVN content.
Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
Programme Leader (Open Development)
OpenDirective http://opendirective.com
On 26 April 2013 10:41, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 11:17 AM, Ross Gardler
> wrote:
>> I just wanted to thank you for the feedback you provided in your last
>> board report with respect to your experiences with moving to Git. This
>> kind of information is really useful to those in other projects...
>
> Note that the Flex team's view on Git as they reported it is fairly
> negative - this is totally understandable considering the history of
> how and when the move happened in that project, but other Apache
> projects are not seeing those issues at all.
>
> I suspect this negative view will evolve over time - either the
> project will revert to svn or they will be happy with Git after
> finding their groove. With this in mind, it would be better to post
> that information to http://blogs.apache.org/flex/ as something that's
> valid at this point in time ("where we are with Git today"), and maybe
> just add the essential, more durable information and links to the
> comdev website.
>
> -Bertrand
Re: Feedback on Flex board report
Hi,
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 11:17 AM, Ross Gardler
wrote:
> I just wanted to thank you for the feedback you provided in your last
> board report with respect to your experiences with moving to Git. This
> kind of information is really useful to those in other projects...
Note that the Flex team's view on Git as they reported it is fairly
negative - this is totally understandable considering the history of
how and when the move happened in that project, but other Apache
projects are not seeing those issues at all.
I suspect this negative view will evolve over time - either the
project will revert to svn or they will be happy with Git after
finding their groove. With this in mind, it would be better to post
that information to http://blogs.apache.org/flex/ as something that's
valid at this point in time ("where we are with Git today"), and maybe
just add the essential, more durable information and links to the
comdev website.
-Bertrand
Feedback on Flex board report
I just wanted to thank you for the feedback you provided in your last board report with respect to your experiences with moving to Git. This kind of information is really useful to those in other projects. For the benefit of the archives (and ComDev PMC) I've copied the relevant section at the end of this mail. I'd really like to see this documented in the ComDev project. Perhaps in the section "For Commtters/PMCs". This could form the start of a page on best practices for version control which would link out to appropriate documentation on Git and SVN workflows, review processes etc. If anyone in the Flex community can write up your experiences as documentation on that site (it is editable by all committers) we'd really appreciate it.Note, the ComDev site is intended to "signpost" into more detailed documentation. The idea is not to be fully detailed but to provide a high level overview linking out to the details. To this end the content in the board report is at about the right level for the ComDev site, it just needs a little context padding for the ComDev site. If you have process documents on your own project pages please feel free to link to them as appropriate. If someone does find the time - thank you in advance. If not, then thank you for including it in the board report. Hopefully I or another ComDev memver will find the time to move it into the ComDev site. Ross Relevant section from board report: We moved our code base from SVN to Git in mid-March. It has been a much more difficult transition than expected. Three weeks later, folks are still confused about how to use Git as it has many options for performing tasks that can have significant implications. Git's database model is not suited for partial checkouts like SVN, making the management of our "whiteboard" (a playground for committers) much more difficult as you have to download the entire whiteboard (currently 245MB) first. There is discussion of managing the whiteboard on GitHub, but others feel that it doesn't conform to the Apache way. The move to Git has slowed contributions from some committers as folks aren't sure they have the time to learn to use Git and are afraid of using the wrong options. Hopefully, the net benefit promised by the Git supporters will eventually be realized. The move to Git has also broken our release and build scripts and we are in the process of fixing them. We also need to get the Git mirrors working again, as well as our CI implementation. Ross Gardler (@rgardler) Programme Leader (Open Development) OpenDirective http://opendirective.com
