Re: Moving Apache Extras
Niclas Hedhman wrote: It is useful that this kind of feedback reaches ComDev, so projects learn from each other and can make informed decisions. As Jan and me have written several times, OpenOffice moved its "Extras" area (which, in the OpenOffice case, consists simply in a binary file repository for some build dependencies) to SourceForge months ago. In the OpenOffice case SourceForge was a natural choice anyway since they host the OpenOffice binary downloads and they are quite reliable from a technical point of view. Of course, the SourceForge reputation incidents were discussed at length on the OpenOffice lists (even though OpenOffice was unaffected at all; they were discussed as a matter of principle) and you can find everything in the archives. I'll note that they fixed the issue they had caused: http://sourceforge.net/blog/project-mirroring-policies-will-be-revisited-with-our-community-panel-existing-mirrors-removed/ and they also implemented better control on the ads they display. I'm confident they have learnt to behave. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Moving Apache Extras
Yes, ASF "central" has no strong opinion on the matter and delegates this totally to the PMCs. It is useful that this kind of feedback reaches ComDev, so projects learn from each other and can make informed decisions. Cheers Niclas On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 12:43 AM, Raul Kripalani wrote: > At Apache Camel we use camel-extras to host Camel components/modules that > depend on 3rd party dependencies that are incompatible with ASLv2. > > After briefly discussing with some committers / contributors on our mailing > lists, I get the impression that most folks would prefer to migrate > camel-extras to Github rather than SF. Since enabling the ASF Camel Github > mirror, we have processed 600+ pull requests and I'd venture a guess that > our generous contributors prefer the Github model for collaborating. In > fact, some of our most engaged camel-extras committers have expressed their > dislike for SF – so imposing SF to camel-extras will be like delivering a > deathblow to the project, as we'll be risking losing those contributors. > > Therefore, my question is: are projects obliged to host their extras on the > ASF's selected platform (Sourceforge)? By reading [1] my conclusion is > 'no', as extras projects don't belong to the ASF nor do they have to follow > the ASF organisational model or policies. I'm pretty sure that a VOTE on > our list would yield Github as the preferred new home. > > [1] https://community.apache.org/apache-extras/faq.html > > Thanks, > > *Raúl Kripalani* > Apache Camel PMC Member & Committer | Enterprise Architect, Open Source > Integration specialist > http://about.me/raulkripalani | http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani > http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk > > On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 4:24 PM, Victor NOËL > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I come in a bit late on the discussion (I hope I won't break the mail > > threading, I don't have a message to answer to…). > > We were discussing the subject on camel-users and I was wondering if you > > were aware of the very problematic behaviour of SourceForge? > > > > I am referring to the following story with the Gimp project: > > > > > > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/11/08/gimp_dumps_sourceforge_over_dodgy_ads_and_installer/ > > > > Basically, they started putting adware and spyware in installers of > > opensource projects without their consent. > > After Gimp removed themselves from SourceForge, they continued by > > impersonating them, see: > > > > > https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list/2015-May/msg00097.html > > > https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list/2015-May/msg00098.html > > > > Do we really want apache extra to be hosted by an organisation like that? > > > > Just my 2cents… sorry for arriving so late in the discussion. > > > > Victor > > -- > > > > > > Vous utilisez la version libre et gratuite d'OBM, développée et supportée > > par Linagora. > > Contribuez à la R&D du produit en souscrivant à une offre entreprise. > > http://pro.obm.org/ - http://www.linagora.com > > > -- Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer http://zest.apache.org - New Energy for Java
Re: Moving Apache Extras
At Apache Camel we use camel-extras to host Camel components/modules that depend on 3rd party dependencies that are incompatible with ASLv2. After briefly discussing with some committers / contributors on our mailing lists, I get the impression that most folks would prefer to migrate camel-extras to Github rather than SF. Since enabling the ASF Camel Github mirror, we have processed 600+ pull requests and I'd venture a guess that our generous contributors prefer the Github model for collaborating. In fact, some of our most engaged camel-extras committers have expressed their dislike for SF – so imposing SF to camel-extras will be like delivering a deathblow to the project, as we'll be risking losing those contributors. Therefore, my question is: are projects obliged to host their extras on the ASF's selected platform (Sourceforge)? By reading [1] my conclusion is 'no', as extras projects don't belong to the ASF nor do they have to follow the ASF organisational model or policies. I'm pretty sure that a VOTE on our list would yield Github as the preferred new home. [1] https://community.apache.org/apache-extras/faq.html Thanks, *Raúl Kripalani* Apache Camel PMC Member & Committer | Enterprise Architect, Open Source Integration specialist http://about.me/raulkripalani | http://www.linkedin.com/in/raulkripalani http://blog.raulkr.net | twitter: @raulvk On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 4:24 PM, Victor NOËL wrote: > Hi, > > I come in a bit late on the discussion (I hope I won't break the mail > threading, I don't have a message to answer to…). > We were discussing the subject on camel-users and I was wondering if you > were aware of the very problematic behaviour of SourceForge? > > I am referring to the following story with the Gimp project: > > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/11/08/gimp_dumps_sourceforge_over_dodgy_ads_and_installer/ > > Basically, they started putting adware and spyware in installers of > opensource projects without their consent. > After Gimp removed themselves from SourceForge, they continued by > impersonating them, see: > > https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list/2015-May/msg00097.html > https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list/2015-May/msg00098.html > > Do we really want apache extra to be hosted by an organisation like that? > > Just my 2cents… sorry for arriving so late in the discussion. > > Victor > -- > > > Vous utilisez la version libre et gratuite d'OBM, développée et supportée > par Linagora. > Contribuez à la R&D du produit en souscrivant à une offre entreprise. > http://pro.obm.org/ - http://www.linagora.com >
RE: Moving Apache Extras
Hi, I come in a bit late on the discussion (I hope I won't break the mail threading, I don't have a message to answer to…). We were discussing the subject on camel-users and I was wondering if you were aware of the very problematic behaviour of SourceForge? I am referring to the following story with the Gimp project: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/11/08/gimp_dumps_sourceforge_over_dodgy_ads_and_installer/ Basically, they started putting adware and spyware in installers of opensource projects without their consent. After Gimp removed themselves from SourceForge, they continued by impersonating them, see: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list/2015-May/msg00097.html https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list/2015-May/msg00098.html Do we really want apache extra to be hosted by an organisation like that? Just my 2cents… sorry for arriving so late in the discussion. Victor -- Vous utilisez la version libre et gratuite d'OBM, développée et supportée par Linagora. Contribuez à la R&D du produit en souscrivant à une offre entreprise. http://pro.obm.org/ - http://www.linagora.com
Re: Moving Apache Extras
On 7/13/15 4:23 PM, jan i wrote: > On Monday, July 13, 2015, Rich Bowen wrote: > >> >> >> On 07/13/2015 04:00 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: >> >>> Apache-extras is a service managed by ComDev. Though we never provided >>> any commitment to support it. >>> >>> However, many extras (most?) are used by ASF PMCs and they need a >>> solution to the fact that Google Code is closing down. We are doing this >>> with infra resources for that reason (as a director you've seen the >>> repeated requests from some PMCs to find a resolution, you've also seen the >>> responses to those requests). >>> >>> It's easier for Infra to move all projects rather than some projects. >>> Hence the current approach. Though you are correct, as noted on a different >>> thread, that the assumption all projects on extras belong to PMCs is likely >>> flawed. Unfortunately there is no easy way of identifying which are PMC >>> owned and which are not. >>> >>> So here's an alternative approach. We (ComDev) send out a mail to PMCs >>> indicating that they need to great a ComDev issue if they want their >>> project moving. If they don't sign up they don't get moved. >>> >>> We (ComDev) provide infra with a reduced list of projects to move and >>> they run the scripts for those projects. >>> >> >> I think I must have been watching all of these conversations (I know it's >> been going for more than a year) with a certain understanding that we were >> going to push everything onto volunteer labor rather than Infra. So, mea >> culpa for not paying close enough attention. Yes, I know that this has been >> discussed for *ages*. >> >> I figured that what we, the ASF, were doing for these projects was >> negotiating with SF for the service/resources/whatever, not doing the >> actual migration. I figured either the projects themselves would do that >> work, or Roberto and his team at SF would do it. > > that was my understanding as well. AOO moved a while ago. > > We should notify the PMCs how to move, and leave the rest to volunteer time. > Migrating a project is pretty much all automated on the SourceForge / Allura importer side. Individuals can even migrate Apache Extra projects on their own if they wanted to. It's all part of the Google Code importer at https://sourceforge.net/p/import_project/google-code/ Scripting up to do bulk migration (instead of one-by-one) would take some work. My impression is that Daniel has done that already. Communicating with project communities seems to be the inherently hard part of this task. But that has to happen no matter what, right? So if there's little difference in workload, I think it'd be better if we do migrate all non-empty projects (rather than make projects do it). That way no projects are left behind and disappear from the internet. Followup work could be tasked to the individual projects to handle. This would include moving Google Code landing page content into either a description or wiki page. And setting up the redirect info on the Google Code project. -- Dave Brondsema : d...@brondsema.net http://www.brondsema.net : personal http://www.splike.com : programming <><
Re: Moving Apache Extras
On 7/14/15 2:54 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: > On 13/07/2015 jan i wrote: >> that was my understanding as well. AOO moved a while ago. > > OpenOffice hasn't properly moved, and actually we need to get this done by the > next release. The current URL is "temporary" as "oooextras.mirror" does not > make > sense (it is not a mirror) and it was meant to become part of the new Apache > Extras and possibly renamed. But yes, if nothing happens we can still keep > "oooextras.mirror" (or similar name; can't check now) which is already under > control of the PMC. > With my SourceForge hat on, you can request a rename to get rid of the ".mirror" part. And a redirect from sf.net/projects/oooextras.mirror/ to sf.net/projects/oooextras/ may be possible if needed. You can contact support via https://sourceforge.net/support (report a support ticket) -- Dave Brondsema : d...@brondsema.net http://www.brondsema.net : personal http://www.splike.com : programming <><
Re: Moving Apache Extras
Hi! A number of apache-extras projects are "reserved names" that PMCs registered before the service was publicly announced. (For reference: see a mail to PMCs of 12 Nov 2010 in archives of community-private) If one tries to access those names, they are redirected to official pages at apache .org. For example, [1] https://code.google.com/a/apache-extras.org/p/tomcat Are those names currently being migrated? As far as I see, those projects are not listed when I click on "Tomcat" label at front page [2], so it is hard to find them, but if I search by name (type "Tomcat" in the search box at [2] and press Enter), they are listed. Technically, my Google account is the owner of projects registered by Apache Tomcat PMC. [2] https://code.google.com/a/apache-extras.org/hosting/ Best regards, Konstantin Kolinko 2015-07-13 23:00 GMT+03:00 Ross Gardler : > Apache-extras is a service managed by ComDev. Though we never provided any > commitment to support it. > > However, many extras (most?) are used by ASF PMCs and they need a solution > to the fact that Google Code is closing down. We are doing this with infra > resources for that reason (as a director you've seen the repeated requests > from some PMCs to find a resolution, you've also seen the responses to those > requests). > > It's easier for Infra to move all projects rather than some projects. Hence > the current approach. Though you are correct, as noted on a different thread, > that the assumption all projects on extras belong to PMCs is likely flawed. > Unfortunately there is no easy way of identifying which are PMC owned and > which are not. > > So here's an alternative approach. We (ComDev) send out a mail to PMCs > indicating that they need to great a ComDev issue if they want their project > moving. If they don't sign up they don't get moved. > > We (ComDev) provide infra with a reduced list of projects to move and they > run the scripts for those projects.
Re: Moving Apache Extras
On 13/07/2015 jan i wrote: that was my understanding as well. AOO moved a while ago. OpenOffice hasn't properly moved, and actually we need to get this done by the next release. The current URL is "temporary" as "oooextras.mirror" does not make sense (it is not a mirror) and it was meant to become part of the new Apache Extras and possibly renamed. But yes, if nothing happens we can still keep "oooextras.mirror" (or similar name; can't check now) which is already under control of the PMC. Regards, Andrea.
Re: Moving Apache Extras
On Monday, July 13, 2015, Rich Bowen wrote: > > > On 07/13/2015 04:00 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: > >> Apache-extras is a service managed by ComDev. Though we never provided >> any commitment to support it. >> >> However, many extras (most?) are used by ASF PMCs and they need a >> solution to the fact that Google Code is closing down. We are doing this >> with infra resources for that reason (as a director you've seen the >> repeated requests from some PMCs to find a resolution, you've also seen the >> responses to those requests). >> >> It's easier for Infra to move all projects rather than some projects. >> Hence the current approach. Though you are correct, as noted on a different >> thread, that the assumption all projects on extras belong to PMCs is likely >> flawed. Unfortunately there is no easy way of identifying which are PMC >> owned and which are not. >> >> So here's an alternative approach. We (ComDev) send out a mail to PMCs >> indicating that they need to great a ComDev issue if they want their >> project moving. If they don't sign up they don't get moved. >> >> We (ComDev) provide infra with a reduced list of projects to move and >> they run the scripts for those projects. >> > > I think I must have been watching all of these conversations (I know it's > been going for more than a year) with a certain understanding that we were > going to push everything onto volunteer labor rather than Infra. So, mea > culpa for not paying close enough attention. Yes, I know that this has been > discussed for *ages*. > > I figured that what we, the ASF, were doing for these projects was > negotiating with SF for the service/resources/whatever, not doing the > actual migration. I figured either the projects themselves would do that > work, or Roberto and his team at SF would do it. that was my understanding as well. AOO moved a while ago. We should notify the PMCs how to move, and leave the rest to volunteer time. rgds jan i > > --Rich > > > >> >> >> Sent from my Windows Phone >> >> From: Rich Bowen<mailto:rbo...@rcbowen.com> >> Sent: 7/13/2015 12:47 PM >> To: dev@community.apache.org<mailto:dev@community.apache.org> >> Subject: Re: Moving Apache Extras >> >> >> >> On 07/09/2015 02:42 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: >> >>> Hiya folks, >>> >>> I'm the "lucky person" in charge of moving the some 350 projects from >>> Google Code to SourceForge. >>> This will happen over the course of next week, save some freak accident >>> occurs, however, SourceForge is not Google Code, and as such, there are >>> a few things we need to consider: >>> >> >> Wait what? >> >> Are you doing this because you're a nice person, or because it's an >> Infra Assignment? >> >> I ask because it seems a really iffy precedent giving paid infra support >> to non-ASF projects. Tell me you're doing this for scotch rather than >> for money, and I'll back off. I know you do wear many different hats. >> >> --Rich >> >> >>> - I will create an admin account that will initially own all the >>> imported projects. This can/will be shared with the ComDev PMC. >>> - Someone (not me!!) will have to step up and help out with delegating >>> read/write access to the new repos on SourceForge. >>> - Preferably, someone will have to go through the giant list of >>> projects, and select those we'll import. This is not strictly necessary, >>> but if someone volunteers for this, that'd be super duper. >>> >>> The most important thing is that we are able to delegate write access to >>> the devs (and do so!), so this does not simply become a big data dump >>> that just sits there. If any of you are interested in taking on that >>> task (preferably more than one person), please do speak up :) >>> >>> With regards, >>> Daniel. >>> >> >> >> -- >> Rich Bowen - rbo...@rcbowen.com - @rbowen >> http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon >> >> > > -- > Rich Bowen - rbo...@rcbowen.com - @rbowen > http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon > -- Sent from My iPad, sorry for any misspellings.
Re: Moving Apache Extras
On 07/13/2015 04:00 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: Apache-extras is a service managed by ComDev. Though we never provided any commitment to support it. However, many extras (most?) are used by ASF PMCs and they need a solution to the fact that Google Code is closing down. We are doing this with infra resources for that reason (as a director you've seen the repeated requests from some PMCs to find a resolution, you've also seen the responses to those requests). It's easier for Infra to move all projects rather than some projects. Hence the current approach. Though you are correct, as noted on a different thread, that the assumption all projects on extras belong to PMCs is likely flawed. Unfortunately there is no easy way of identifying which are PMC owned and which are not. So here's an alternative approach. We (ComDev) send out a mail to PMCs indicating that they need to great a ComDev issue if they want their project moving. If they don't sign up they don't get moved. We (ComDev) provide infra with a reduced list of projects to move and they run the scripts for those projects. I think I must have been watching all of these conversations (I know it's been going for more than a year) with a certain understanding that we were going to push everything onto volunteer labor rather than Infra. So, mea culpa for not paying close enough attention. Yes, I know that this has been discussed for *ages*. I figured that what we, the ASF, were doing for these projects was negotiating with SF for the service/resources/whatever, not doing the actual migration. I figured either the projects themselves would do that work, or Roberto and his team at SF would do it. --Rich Sent from my Windows Phone From: Rich Bowen<mailto:rbo...@rcbowen.com> Sent: 7/13/2015 12:47 PM To: dev@community.apache.org<mailto:dev@community.apache.org> Subject: Re: Moving Apache Extras On 07/09/2015 02:42 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: Hiya folks, I'm the "lucky person" in charge of moving the some 350 projects from Google Code to SourceForge. This will happen over the course of next week, save some freak accident occurs, however, SourceForge is not Google Code, and as such, there are a few things we need to consider: Wait what? Are you doing this because you're a nice person, or because it's an Infra Assignment? I ask because it seems a really iffy precedent giving paid infra support to non-ASF projects. Tell me you're doing this for scotch rather than for money, and I'll back off. I know you do wear many different hats. --Rich - I will create an admin account that will initially own all the imported projects. This can/will be shared with the ComDev PMC. - Someone (not me!!) will have to step up and help out with delegating read/write access to the new repos on SourceForge. - Preferably, someone will have to go through the giant list of projects, and select those we'll import. This is not strictly necessary, but if someone volunteers for this, that'd be super duper. The most important thing is that we are able to delegate write access to the devs (and do so!), so this does not simply become a big data dump that just sits there. If any of you are interested in taking on that task (preferably more than one person), please do speak up :) With regards, Daniel. -- Rich Bowen - rbo...@rcbowen.com - @rbowen http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon -- Rich Bowen - rbo...@rcbowen.com - @rbowen http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
RE: Moving Apache Extras
Apache-extras is a service managed by ComDev. Though we never provided any commitment to support it. However, many extras (most?) are used by ASF PMCs and they need a solution to the fact that Google Code is closing down. We are doing this with infra resources for that reason (as a director you've seen the repeated requests from some PMCs to find a resolution, you've also seen the responses to those requests). It's easier for Infra to move all projects rather than some projects. Hence the current approach. Though you are correct, as noted on a different thread, that the assumption all projects on extras belong to PMCs is likely flawed. Unfortunately there is no easy way of identifying which are PMC owned and which are not. So here's an alternative approach. We (ComDev) send out a mail to PMCs indicating that they need to great a ComDev issue if they want their project moving. If they don't sign up they don't get moved. We (ComDev) provide infra with a reduced list of projects to move and they run the scripts for those projects. Sent from my Windows Phone From: Rich Bowen<mailto:rbo...@rcbowen.com> Sent: 7/13/2015 12:47 PM To: dev@community.apache.org<mailto:dev@community.apache.org> Subject: Re: Moving Apache Extras On 07/09/2015 02:42 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: > Hiya folks, > > I'm the "lucky person" in charge of moving the some 350 projects from > Google Code to SourceForge. > This will happen over the course of next week, save some freak accident > occurs, however, SourceForge is not Google Code, and as such, there are > a few things we need to consider: Wait what? Are you doing this because you're a nice person, or because it's an Infra Assignment? I ask because it seems a really iffy precedent giving paid infra support to non-ASF projects. Tell me you're doing this for scotch rather than for money, and I'll back off. I know you do wear many different hats. --Rich > > - I will create an admin account that will initially own all the > imported projects. This can/will be shared with the ComDev PMC. > - Someone (not me!!) will have to step up and help out with delegating > read/write access to the new repos on SourceForge. > - Preferably, someone will have to go through the giant list of > projects, and select those we'll import. This is not strictly necessary, > but if someone volunteers for this, that'd be super duper. > > The most important thing is that we are able to delegate write access to > the devs (and do so!), so this does not simply become a big data dump > that just sits there. If any of you are interested in taking on that > task (preferably more than one person), please do speak up :) > > With regards, > Daniel. -- Rich Bowen - rbo...@rcbowen.com - @rbowen http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
Re: Moving Apache Extras
On 07/09/2015 02:42 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: Hiya folks, I'm the "lucky person" in charge of moving the some 350 projects from Google Code to SourceForge. This will happen over the course of next week, save some freak accident occurs, however, SourceForge is not Google Code, and as such, there are a few things we need to consider: Wait what? Are you doing this because you're a nice person, or because it's an Infra Assignment? I ask because it seems a really iffy precedent giving paid infra support to non-ASF projects. Tell me you're doing this for scotch rather than for money, and I'll back off. I know you do wear many different hats. --Rich - I will create an admin account that will initially own all the imported projects. This can/will be shared with the ComDev PMC. - Someone (not me!!) will have to step up and help out with delegating read/write access to the new repos on SourceForge. - Preferably, someone will have to go through the giant list of projects, and select those we'll import. This is not strictly necessary, but if someone volunteers for this, that'd be super duper. The most important thing is that we are able to delegate write access to the devs (and do so!), so this does not simply become a big data dump that just sits there. If any of you are interested in taking on that task (preferably more than one person), please do speak up :) With regards, Daniel. -- Rich Bowen - rbo...@rcbowen.com - @rbowen http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
Re: Moving Apache Extras
On 07/13/2015 03:21 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: Most (if not all) are managed by members of the PMCs. Though you make a very good point. The assumption that all of them are PMC managed is quite possibly flawed. My experience is primarily from the other side - when I worked at SF, and tried to contact projects that seemed, to me, to be related to ASF projects, I was almost without exception told that they were not affiliated in any way. This was about 3 years ago. --Rich We still need to tell PMCs what is going on, but we should also ask them to communicate it to their dev communities. Does anyone have any ideas how we can reach out to others? Ross -Original Message- From: Rich Bowen [mailto:rbo...@rcbowen.com] Sent: Monday, July 13, 2015 12:16 PM To: dev@community.apache.org Subject: Re: Moving Apache Extras On 07/10/2015 12:05 AM, Ross Gardler wrote: Assigning admin rights to PMCs is part of the transition isn't it? You didn't actually answer my question, so maybe my assumption was incorrect. If this is ongoing work then we need to be clear on what ComDev is signing up to here. For PMC mails I was just thinking of a blanket mail to all PMCs not one to specific owners. Perhaps I'm confused. Apache Extras is projects that aren't ASF projects, right? So they're not controlled by a PMC. Am I missing something? Sent from my Windows Phone From: David Nalley<mailto:da...@gnsa.us> Sent: 7/9/2015 8:51 PM To: dev@community.apache.org<mailto:dev@community.apache.org> Subject: Re: Moving Apache Extras On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 3:18 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: Thanks Daniel, Sharing admin account with ComDev PMC makes sense. By "delegating read/write access to the new repos" do you mean the ComDev owned admin account will assign individual project admin rights to the relevant PMC upon request. If that's the case then the ComDev PMC as a whole can own this responsibility. We can manage it through JIRA, that way when Infra gets requests they can simply reassign to ComDev. It would be wonderful if the infra contractors could help with this workload, but I see no reason why ComDev volunteers (including me) can't help. Currently, Comdev owns Apache Extras. My preference is that it stays that way, and that infra manages the transition only. This is essentially the same number of git repos that we currently manage for all of the ASF, but access management is pretty significantly automated and largely managed by project chairs rather than Infra. I've been meaning to go through the list but if my assumption above is correct I see an alternative and less labour intensive option. Accounts that are still owned by ComDev after x months (I suggest a minimum of 12 months) will be examined and if appropriate closed. It would be great if you, as part of your migration process, will handle the notifications to PMCs to ensure they are aware of this. I'd suggest one email saying "we will do this, you will need to open a ComDev ticket to ensure you get admin access promptly". Followed by a, "we are doing it now" and a final "it's done, all further enquiries to ComDev". Just to make sure we are talking about the same thing many of the projects have more than one PMC listed. The average over a quick sample of 10, was 3 PMCs listed per project. Is that expected? It seems to be doing that via labels, but not all labels per project are PMCs. (for instance, there are labels of NoSQL, cql, cms, Server, java, esb, etc.) Daniel: Is there a way to script the above away? I assume there is, but haven't delved into the google code api yet, nor figured out how to translate some of the non-existent PMC labels away. --David -- Rich Bowen - rbo...@rcbowen.com - @rbowen http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon -- Rich Bowen - rbo...@rcbowen.com - @rbowen http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
RE: Moving Apache Extras
Most (if not all) are managed by members of the PMCs. Though you make a very good point. The assumption that all of them are PMC managed is quite possibly flawed. We still need to tell PMCs what is going on, but we should also ask them to communicate it to their dev communities. Does anyone have any ideas how we can reach out to others? Ross -Original Message- From: Rich Bowen [mailto:rbo...@rcbowen.com] Sent: Monday, July 13, 2015 12:16 PM To: dev@community.apache.org Subject: Re: Moving Apache Extras On 07/10/2015 12:05 AM, Ross Gardler wrote: > Assigning admin rights to PMCs is part of the transition isn't it? You didn't > actually answer my question, so maybe my assumption was incorrect. If this is > ongoing work then we need to be clear on what ComDev is signing up to here. > > For PMC mails I was just thinking of a blanket mail to all PMCs not one to > specific owners. Perhaps I'm confused. Apache Extras is projects that aren't ASF projects, right? So they're not controlled by a PMC. Am I missing something? > > Sent from my Windows Phone > > From: David Nalley<mailto:da...@gnsa.us> > Sent: 7/9/2015 8:51 PM > To: dev@community.apache.org<mailto:dev@community.apache.org> > Subject: Re: Moving Apache Extras > > On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 3:18 PM, Ross Gardler > wrote: >> Thanks Daniel, >> >> Sharing admin account with ComDev PMC makes sense. >> >> By "delegating read/write access to the new repos" do you mean the ComDev >> owned admin account will assign individual project admin rights to the >> relevant PMC upon request. If that's the case then the ComDev PMC as a whole >> can own this responsibility. We can manage it through JIRA, that way when >> Infra gets requests they can simply reassign to ComDev. It would be >> wonderful if the infra contractors could help with this workload, but I see >> no reason why ComDev volunteers (including me) can't help. >> > > Currently, Comdev owns Apache Extras. My preference is that it stays > that way, and that infra manages the transition only. This is > essentially the same number of git repos that we currently manage for > all of the ASF, but access management is pretty significantly > automated and largely managed by project chairs rather than Infra. > >> I've been meaning to go through the list but if my assumption above is >> correct I see an alternative and less labour intensive option. Accounts that >> are still owned by ComDev after x months (I suggest a minimum of 12 months) >> will be examined and if appropriate closed. >> >> It would be great if you, as part of your migration process, will handle the >> notifications to PMCs to ensure they are aware of this. I'd suggest one >> email saying "we will do this, you will need to open a ComDev ticket to >> ensure you get admin access promptly". Followed by a, "we are doing it now" >> and a final "it's done, all further enquiries to ComDev". >> > > Just to make sure we are talking about the same thing many of the > projects have more than one PMC listed. The average over a quick > sample of 10, was 3 PMCs listed per project. Is that expected? It > seems to be doing that via labels, but not all labels per project are > PMCs. (for instance, there are labels of NoSQL, cql, cms, Server, > java, esb, etc.) > > Daniel: Is there a way to script the above away? I assume there is, > but haven't delved into the google code api yet, nor figured out how > to translate some of the non-existent PMC labels away. > > --David > -- Rich Bowen - rbo...@rcbowen.com - @rbowen http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
Re: Moving Apache Extras
On 07/10/2015 12:05 AM, Ross Gardler wrote: Assigning admin rights to PMCs is part of the transition isn't it? You didn't actually answer my question, so maybe my assumption was incorrect. If this is ongoing work then we need to be clear on what ComDev is signing up to here. For PMC mails I was just thinking of a blanket mail to all PMCs not one to specific owners. Perhaps I'm confused. Apache Extras is projects that aren't ASF projects, right? So they're not controlled by a PMC. Am I missing something? Sent from my Windows Phone From: David Nalley<mailto:da...@gnsa.us> Sent: 7/9/2015 8:51 PM To: dev@community.apache.org<mailto:dev@community.apache.org> Subject: Re: Moving Apache Extras On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 3:18 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: Thanks Daniel, Sharing admin account with ComDev PMC makes sense. By "delegating read/write access to the new repos" do you mean the ComDev owned admin account will assign individual project admin rights to the relevant PMC upon request. If that's the case then the ComDev PMC as a whole can own this responsibility. We can manage it through JIRA, that way when Infra gets requests they can simply reassign to ComDev. It would be wonderful if the infra contractors could help with this workload, but I see no reason why ComDev volunteers (including me) can't help. Currently, Comdev owns Apache Extras. My preference is that it stays that way, and that infra manages the transition only. This is essentially the same number of git repos that we currently manage for all of the ASF, but access management is pretty significantly automated and largely managed by project chairs rather than Infra. I've been meaning to go through the list but if my assumption above is correct I see an alternative and less labour intensive option. Accounts that are still owned by ComDev after x months (I suggest a minimum of 12 months) will be examined and if appropriate closed. It would be great if you, as part of your migration process, will handle the notifications to PMCs to ensure they are aware of this. I'd suggest one email saying "we will do this, you will need to open a ComDev ticket to ensure you get admin access promptly". Followed by a, "we are doing it now" and a final "it's done, all further enquiries to ComDev". Just to make sure we are talking about the same thing many of the projects have more than one PMC listed. The average over a quick sample of 10, was 3 PMCs listed per project. Is that expected? It seems to be doing that via labels, but not all labels per project are PMCs. (for instance, there are labels of NoSQL, cql, cms, Server, java, esb, etc.) Daniel: Is there a way to script the above away? I assume there is, but haven't delved into the google code api yet, nor figured out how to translate some of the non-existent PMC labels away. --David -- Rich Bowen - rbo...@rcbowen.com - @rbowen http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
RE: Moving Apache Extras
Assigning admin rights to PMCs is part of the transition isn't it? You didn't actually answer my question, so maybe my assumption was incorrect. If this is ongoing work then we need to be clear on what ComDev is signing up to here. For PMC mails I was just thinking of a blanket mail to all PMCs not one to specific owners. Sent from my Windows Phone From: David Nalley<mailto:da...@gnsa.us> Sent: 7/9/2015 8:51 PM To: dev@community.apache.org<mailto:dev@community.apache.org> Subject: Re: Moving Apache Extras On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 3:18 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: > Thanks Daniel, > > Sharing admin account with ComDev PMC makes sense. > > By "delegating read/write access to the new repos" do you mean the ComDev > owned admin account will assign individual project admin rights to the > relevant PMC upon request. If that's the case then the ComDev PMC as a whole > can own this responsibility. We can manage it through JIRA, that way when > Infra gets requests they can simply reassign to ComDev. It would be wonderful > if the infra contractors could help with this workload, but I see no reason > why ComDev volunteers (including me) can't help. > Currently, Comdev owns Apache Extras. My preference is that it stays that way, and that infra manages the transition only. This is essentially the same number of git repos that we currently manage for all of the ASF, but access management is pretty significantly automated and largely managed by project chairs rather than Infra. > I've been meaning to go through the list but if my assumption above is > correct I see an alternative and less labour intensive option. Accounts that > are still owned by ComDev after x months (I suggest a minimum of 12 months) > will be examined and if appropriate closed. > > It would be great if you, as part of your migration process, will handle the > notifications to PMCs to ensure they are aware of this. I'd suggest one email > saying "we will do this, you will need to open a ComDev ticket to ensure you > get admin access promptly". Followed by a, "we are doing it now" and a final > "it's done, all further enquiries to ComDev". > Just to make sure we are talking about the same thing many of the projects have more than one PMC listed. The average over a quick sample of 10, was 3 PMCs listed per project. Is that expected? It seems to be doing that via labels, but not all labels per project are PMCs. (for instance, there are labels of NoSQL, cql, cms, Server, java, esb, etc.) Daniel: Is there a way to script the above away? I assume there is, but haven't delved into the google code api yet, nor figured out how to translate some of the non-existent PMC labels away. --David
Re: Moving Apache Extras
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 3:18 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: > Thanks Daniel, > > Sharing admin account with ComDev PMC makes sense. > > By "delegating read/write access to the new repos" do you mean the ComDev > owned admin account will assign individual project admin rights to the > relevant PMC upon request. If that's the case then the ComDev PMC as a whole > can own this responsibility. We can manage it through JIRA, that way when > Infra gets requests they can simply reassign to ComDev. It would be wonderful > if the infra contractors could help with this workload, but I see no reason > why ComDev volunteers (including me) can't help. > Currently, Comdev owns Apache Extras. My preference is that it stays that way, and that infra manages the transition only. This is essentially the same number of git repos that we currently manage for all of the ASF, but access management is pretty significantly automated and largely managed by project chairs rather than Infra. > I've been meaning to go through the list but if my assumption above is > correct I see an alternative and less labour intensive option. Accounts that > are still owned by ComDev after x months (I suggest a minimum of 12 months) > will be examined and if appropriate closed. > > It would be great if you, as part of your migration process, will handle the > notifications to PMCs to ensure they are aware of this. I'd suggest one email > saying "we will do this, you will need to open a ComDev ticket to ensure you > get admin access promptly". Followed by a, "we are doing it now" and a final > "it's done, all further enquiries to ComDev". > Just to make sure we are talking about the same thing many of the projects have more than one PMC listed. The average over a quick sample of 10, was 3 PMCs listed per project. Is that expected? It seems to be doing that via labels, but not all labels per project are PMCs. (for instance, there are labels of NoSQL, cql, cms, Server, java, esb, etc.) Daniel: Is there a way to script the above away? I assume there is, but haven't delved into the google code api yet, nor figured out how to translate some of the non-existent PMC labels away. --David
RE: Moving Apache Extras
When the time comes please make the request through whatever channel is needed. We won't remember requests coming in right now. Sent from my Windows Phone From: Roger Whitcomb<mailto:rogerandb...@rbwhitcomb.com> Sent: 7/9/2015 2:01 PM To: dev@community.apache.org<mailto:dev@community.apache.org> Subject: Re: Moving Apache Extras Definitely need admin rights to the new Pivot-Extras for the Pivot PMC. Thanks, ~Roger Whitcomb Apache Pivot PMC Chair > On Jul 9, 2015, at 12:18 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: > > Thanks Daniel, > > Sharing admin account with ComDev PMC makes sense. > > By "delegating read/write access to the new repos" do you mean the ComDev > owned admin account will assign individual project admin rights to the > relevant PMC upon request. If that's the case then the ComDev PMC as a whole > can own this responsibility. We can manage it through JIRA, that way when > Infra gets requests they can simply reassign to ComDev. It would be wonderful > if the infra contractors could help with this workload, but I see no reason > why ComDev volunteers (including me) can't help. > > I've been meaning to go through the list but if my assumption above is > correct I see an alternative and less labour intensive option. Accounts that > are still owned by ComDev after x months (I suggest a minimum of 12 months) > will be examined and if appropriate closed. > > It would be great if you, as part of your migration process, will handle the > notifications to PMCs to ensure they are aware of this. I'd suggest one email > saying "we will do this, you will need to open a ComDev ticket to ensure you > get admin access promptly". Followed by a, "we are doing it now" and a final > "it's done, all further enquiries to ComDev". > > Ross > > -Original Message- > From: Daniel Gruno [mailto:humbed...@apache.org] > Sent: Thursday, July 9, 2015 11:43 AM > To: dev@community.apache.org > Subject: Moving Apache Extras > > Hiya folks, > > I'm the "lucky person" in charge of moving the some 350 projects from Google > Code to SourceForge. > This will happen over the course of next week, save some freak accident > occurs, however, SourceForge is not Google Code, and as such, there are a few > things we need to consider: > > - I will create an admin account that will initially own all the imported > projects. This can/will be shared with the ComDev PMC. > - Someone (not me!!) will have to step up and help out with delegating > read/write access to the new repos on SourceForge. > - Preferably, someone will have to go through the giant list of projects, and > select those we'll import. This is not strictly necessary, but if someone > volunteers for this, that'd be super duper. > > The most important thing is that we are able to delegate write access to the > devs (and do so!), so this does not simply become a big data dump that just > sits there. If any of you are interested in taking on that task (preferably > more than one person), please do speak up :) > > With regards, > Daniel.
Re: Moving Apache Extras
Definitely need admin rights to the new Pivot-Extras for the Pivot PMC. Thanks, ~Roger Whitcomb Apache Pivot PMC Chair > On Jul 9, 2015, at 12:18 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: > > Thanks Daniel, > > Sharing admin account with ComDev PMC makes sense. > > By "delegating read/write access to the new repos" do you mean the ComDev > owned admin account will assign individual project admin rights to the > relevant PMC upon request. If that's the case then the ComDev PMC as a whole > can own this responsibility. We can manage it through JIRA, that way when > Infra gets requests they can simply reassign to ComDev. It would be wonderful > if the infra contractors could help with this workload, but I see no reason > why ComDev volunteers (including me) can't help. > > I've been meaning to go through the list but if my assumption above is > correct I see an alternative and less labour intensive option. Accounts that > are still owned by ComDev after x months (I suggest a minimum of 12 months) > will be examined and if appropriate closed. > > It would be great if you, as part of your migration process, will handle the > notifications to PMCs to ensure they are aware of this. I'd suggest one email > saying "we will do this, you will need to open a ComDev ticket to ensure you > get admin access promptly". Followed by a, "we are doing it now" and a final > "it's done, all further enquiries to ComDev". > > Ross > > -Original Message- > From: Daniel Gruno [mailto:humbed...@apache.org] > Sent: Thursday, July 9, 2015 11:43 AM > To: dev@community.apache.org > Subject: Moving Apache Extras > > Hiya folks, > > I'm the "lucky person" in charge of moving the some 350 projects from Google > Code to SourceForge. > This will happen over the course of next week, save some freak accident > occurs, however, SourceForge is not Google Code, and as such, there are a few > things we need to consider: > > - I will create an admin account that will initially own all the imported > projects. This can/will be shared with the ComDev PMC. > - Someone (not me!!) will have to step up and help out with delegating > read/write access to the new repos on SourceForge. > - Preferably, someone will have to go through the giant list of projects, and > select those we'll import. This is not strictly necessary, but if someone > volunteers for this, that'd be super duper. > > The most important thing is that we are able to delegate write access to the > devs (and do so!), so this does not simply become a big data dump that just > sits there. If any of you are interested in taking on that task (preferably > more than one person), please do speak up :) > > With regards, > Daniel.
Re: Moving Apache Extras
Okay, that's fine. Thanks. I'm sure I can find stuff in the archives. I just wasn't sure what the final reasoning was. NBD. -- Christopher L Tubbs II http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 4:15 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: > That discussion has been had a number of times. We're not opening it again > since we are ready to pull the trigger on SF. The archives have the > discussion (sorry, not got the time to search them and find links right now). > > -Original Message- > From: Christopher [mailto:ctubb...@apache.org] > Sent: Thursday, July 9, 2015 12:52 PM > To: ComDev > Subject: Re: Moving Apache Extras > > It seems to me that moving to GitHub would be easier, since Google put a > "Export to GitHub" button on each project page, and I've used it and it works > well. > Perhaps I missed it, but was there a reason why SourceForge was chosen over > GitHub? (Just curious... since I have no personal stake in this > endeavor.) > > -- > Christopher L Tubbs II > http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii > > > On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: >> Hiya folks, >> >> I'm the "lucky person" in charge of moving the some 350 projects from >> Google Code to SourceForge. >> This will happen over the course of next week, save some freak >> accident occurs, however, SourceForge is not Google Code, and as such, >> there are a few things we need to consider: >> >> - I will create an admin account that will initially own all the >> imported projects. This can/will be shared with the ComDev PMC. >> - Someone (not me!!) will have to step up and help out with delegating >> read/write access to the new repos on SourceForge. >> - Preferably, someone will have to go through the giant list of >> projects, and select those we'll import. This is not strictly >> necessary, but if someone volunteers for this, that'd be super duper. >> >> The most important thing is that we are able to delegate write access >> to the devs (and do so!), so this does not simply become a big data >> dump that just sits there. If any of you are interested in taking on >> that task (preferably more than one person), please do speak up :) >> >> With regards, >> Daniel.
RE: Moving Apache Extras
That discussion has been had a number of times. We're not opening it again since we are ready to pull the trigger on SF. The archives have the discussion (sorry, not got the time to search them and find links right now). -Original Message- From: Christopher [mailto:ctubb...@apache.org] Sent: Thursday, July 9, 2015 12:52 PM To: ComDev Subject: Re: Moving Apache Extras It seems to me that moving to GitHub would be easier, since Google put a "Export to GitHub" button on each project page, and I've used it and it works well. Perhaps I missed it, but was there a reason why SourceForge was chosen over GitHub? (Just curious... since I have no personal stake in this endeavor.) -- Christopher L Tubbs II http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: > Hiya folks, > > I'm the "lucky person" in charge of moving the some 350 projects from > Google Code to SourceForge. > This will happen over the course of next week, save some freak > accident occurs, however, SourceForge is not Google Code, and as such, > there are a few things we need to consider: > > - I will create an admin account that will initially own all the > imported projects. This can/will be shared with the ComDev PMC. > - Someone (not me!!) will have to step up and help out with delegating > read/write access to the new repos on SourceForge. > - Preferably, someone will have to go through the giant list of > projects, and select those we'll import. This is not strictly > necessary, but if someone volunteers for this, that'd be super duper. > > The most important thing is that we are able to delegate write access > to the devs (and do so!), so this does not simply become a big data > dump that just sits there. If any of you are interested in taking on > that task (preferably more than one person), please do speak up :) > > With regards, > Daniel.
Re: Moving Apache Extras
It seems to me that moving to GitHub would be easier, since Google put a "Export to GitHub" button on each project page, and I've used it and it works well. Perhaps I missed it, but was there a reason why SourceForge was chosen over GitHub? (Just curious... since I have no personal stake in this endeavor.) -- Christopher L Tubbs II http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Daniel Gruno wrote: > Hiya folks, > > I'm the "lucky person" in charge of moving the some 350 projects from Google > Code to SourceForge. > This will happen over the course of next week, save some freak accident > occurs, however, SourceForge is not Google Code, and as such, there are a > few things we need to consider: > > - I will create an admin account that will initially own all the imported > projects. This can/will be shared with the ComDev PMC. > - Someone (not me!!) will have to step up and help out with delegating > read/write access to the new repos on SourceForge. > - Preferably, someone will have to go through the giant list of projects, > and select those we'll import. This is not strictly necessary, but if > someone volunteers for this, that'd be super duper. > > The most important thing is that we are able to delegate write access to the > devs (and do so!), so this does not simply become a big data dump that just > sits there. If any of you are interested in taking on that task (preferably > more than one person), please do speak up :) > > With regards, > Daniel.
RE: Moving Apache Extras
Thanks Daniel, Sharing admin account with ComDev PMC makes sense. By "delegating read/write access to the new repos" do you mean the ComDev owned admin account will assign individual project admin rights to the relevant PMC upon request. If that's the case then the ComDev PMC as a whole can own this responsibility. We can manage it through JIRA, that way when Infra gets requests they can simply reassign to ComDev. It would be wonderful if the infra contractors could help with this workload, but I see no reason why ComDev volunteers (including me) can't help. I've been meaning to go through the list but if my assumption above is correct I see an alternative and less labour intensive option. Accounts that are still owned by ComDev after x months (I suggest a minimum of 12 months) will be examined and if appropriate closed. It would be great if you, as part of your migration process, will handle the notifications to PMCs to ensure they are aware of this. I'd suggest one email saying "we will do this, you will need to open a ComDev ticket to ensure you get admin access promptly". Followed by a, "we are doing it now" and a final "it's done, all further enquiries to ComDev". Ross -Original Message- From: Daniel Gruno [mailto:humbed...@apache.org] Sent: Thursday, July 9, 2015 11:43 AM To: dev@community.apache.org Subject: Moving Apache Extras Hiya folks, I'm the "lucky person" in charge of moving the some 350 projects from Google Code to SourceForge. This will happen over the course of next week, save some freak accident occurs, however, SourceForge is not Google Code, and as such, there are a few things we need to consider: - I will create an admin account that will initially own all the imported projects. This can/will be shared with the ComDev PMC. - Someone (not me!!) will have to step up and help out with delegating read/write access to the new repos on SourceForge. - Preferably, someone will have to go through the giant list of projects, and select those we'll import. This is not strictly necessary, but if someone volunteers for this, that'd be super duper. The most important thing is that we are able to delegate write access to the devs (and do so!), so this does not simply become a big data dump that just sits there. If any of you are interested in taking on that task (preferably more than one person), please do speak up :) With regards, Daniel.
Moving Apache Extras
Hiya folks, I'm the "lucky person" in charge of moving the some 350 projects from Google Code to SourceForge. This will happen over the course of next week, save some freak accident occurs, however, SourceForge is not Google Code, and as such, there are a few things we need to consider: - I will create an admin account that will initially own all the imported projects. This can/will be shared with the ComDev PMC. - Someone (not me!!) will have to step up and help out with delegating read/write access to the new repos on SourceForge. - Preferably, someone will have to go through the giant list of projects, and select those we'll import. This is not strictly necessary, but if someone volunteers for this, that'd be super duper. The most important thing is that we are able to delegate write access to the devs (and do so!), so this does not simply become a big data dump that just sits there. If any of you are interested in taking on that task (preferably more than one person), please do speak up :) With regards, Daniel.
