Re: Moving Apache Extras

[Andrea Pescetti]

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

[Raul Kripalani]

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 du produit en souscrivant à une offre entreprise.
> http://pro.obm.org/ - http://www.linagora.com
>

RE: Moving Apache Extras

[Victor NOËL]

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 du produit en souscrivant à une offre entreprise.
http://pro.obm.org/ - http://www.linagora.com

Re: Moving Apache Extras

[Niclas Hedhman]

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 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

[Andrea Pescetti]

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

[Konstantin Kolinko]

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 ross.gard...@microsoft.com:
 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

[Dave Brondsema]

On 7/13/15 4:23 PM, jan i wrote:
 On Monday, July 13, 2015, Rich Bowen rbo...@rcbowen.com 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

[Rich Bowen]

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 Nalleymailto:da...@gnsa.us
Sent: ‎7/‎9/‎2015 8:51 PM
To: dev@community.apache.orgmailto:dev@community.apache.org
Subject: Re: Moving Apache Extras

On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 3:18 PM, Ross Gardler ross.gard...@microsoft.com 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

[Rich Bowen]

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 Bowenmailto:rbo...@rcbowen.com
Sent: ‎7/‎13/‎2015 12:47 PM
To: dev@community.apache.orgmailto: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

[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.



Sent from my Windows Phone

From: Rich Bowenmailto:rbo...@rcbowen.com
Sent: ‎7/‎13/‎2015 12:47 PM
To: dev@community.apache.orgmailto: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

[jan i]

On Monday, July 13, 2015, Rich Bowen rbo...@rcbowen.com 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 Bowenmailto:rbo...@rcbowen.com
 Sent: ‎7/‎13/‎2015 12:47 PM
 To: dev@community.apache.orgmailto: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

[David Nalley]

On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 3:18 PM, Ross Gardler ross.gard...@microsoft.com 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

[Ross Gardler]

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 Whitcombmailto:rogerandb...@rbwhitcomb.com
Sent: ‎7/‎9/‎2015 2:01 PM
To: dev@community.apache.orgmailto: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 ross.gard...@microsoft.com 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

[Ross Gardler]

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 Nalleymailto:da...@gnsa.us
Sent: ‎7/‎9/‎2015 8:51 PM
To: dev@community.apache.orgmailto:dev@community.apache.org
Subject: Re: Moving Apache Extras

On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 3:18 PM, Ross Gardler ross.gard...@microsoft.com 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

[Christopher]

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 ross.gard...@microsoft.com 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 humbed...@apache.org 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

[Roger Whitcomb]

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 ross.gard...@microsoft.com 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

[Ross Gardler]

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 humbed...@apache.org 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

[Ross Gardler]

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

[Christopher]

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 humbed...@apache.org 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.