Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
+1 (non binding). Willing to help. Git shows clear advantages over svn. Le 5 sept. 2012 14:37, "Garvin LeClaire" a écrit : > +1 (non-binding) > > -- > Regards, > > > Garvin LeClaire > garvin.lecla...@gmail.com > > > On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 8:33 AM, Anders Hammar wrote: > > +1 (non-binding) > > > > But I don't have the hard-core git knowledge to help out in the move. > > Would probably do more harm than good. :-) > > > > /Anders > > On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 2:19 PM, Kristian Rosenvold > > wrote: > >> The hosting bit is defined in context of apache, there is not much we > >> need to do in that respect. This dusussion has been on/off for quite a > >> few years, so I'm not entirely surprised if you haven't seen it all. > >> > >> As for "fad", I'm old enough to believe that version control systems > >> have their "epochs". No-one is using cvs anymore. This seems to be the > >> decade of git; I'm sure something new & shiney will pop up in a few > >> years time. > >> > >> > >> Kristian > >> > >> > >> 2012/9/5 Chris Graham : > >>> -1 Non binding. > >>> > >>> I have no desire to setup and learn new tools for no clearly apparent > >>> advantages. > >>> There appears to be multitude of ways that DSCM's can be configured. > I'm > >>> not sure if sufficient thought/discussion has been given to the way in > >>> which it should/can be set up. > >>> Where it is to be hosted? > >>> > >>> My view: Move got a good reason. A fad is not a good reason. > >>> > >>> -Chris > >>> > >>> On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 9:25 PM, Stephen Connolly < > >>> stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > +1. Have no spare time ATM, so cannot volunteer even if I would love > to > > On 5 September 2012 12:04, Olivier Lamy wrote: > > > Hi, > > This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in > one > > svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). > > First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra > > for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if > you > > are volunteer you must say that with your vote). > > The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the > > minimum of 3 volunteers ! > > BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! > > The vote will decide on moving all the source tree (volunteers time > > will the main throttle). > > > > Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on dev@ is > > mandatory). > > The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, > indexer,core, > > wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with > > plugins immediately :-) ) > > > > Vote open for 72H. > > > > [+1] Move to git scm > > [0] No interest > > [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) > > > > > > Thanks, > > -- > > Olivier Lamy > > Talend: http://coders.talend.com > > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy > > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > > > >> > >> - > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >> > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >
Re: Git as the canonical SCM
2012/9/6 Chris Graham : > The fact that a lot of people have said +1 and there are still discussions > around how to best set up a repo, means to me, that there is lots more room > for dissussion. We have a hundred projects or more ;) A substantial group of people here have been through extensive git migrations, so we know the basic moves. I know it can be hard to distinguish when we're discussing nitty-gritty details from hugely important issues, since most of the time we're not being very clear about this (and we always discuss as if it's vitally important ;). I think it's safe to expect that we'll be going through a few alternatives for some of the projects. And migrating everything is probably a quite long story. Kristian - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
I think it would be a very pragmatic move to simply leave the "maven-plugins" project unmigrated until we have established documentation and tool support to a level where we're happy with whatever solution we choose. I think the only really disasterous version we could end up with is the one which is currently in the maven-plugins asf repo, where the structure of the repo changes entirely as you checkout a tag. Other than that I don't /really/ think one-repo-per-plugin, one big repo or some other subdivision (maven-xAR-plugins comes to mind) is going to make that much of a difference. Kristian 2012/9/6 Brett Porter : > +0.5 if it makes devs or patchers lives easier > > No time to help, and I'd like to see a clearer understanding of how we'll > convert non-t/b/t-layout repos before we end up with 50 repositories as > others have said. > > BTW, if anyone is looking at doing that, I found the svn2git worked well for > filtering, without having to resort to an svndumpfilter first (I believe it > even addresses "moves from outside of the subtree's history"). > > - Brett > > On 05/09/2012, at 4:04 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote: > >> Hi, >> This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one >> svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). >> First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra >> for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if you >> are volunteer you must say that with your vote). >> The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the >> minimum of 3 volunteers ! >> BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! >> The vote will decide on moving all the source tree (volunteers time >> will the main throttle). >> >> Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on dev@ is mandatory). >> The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, indexer,core, >> wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with >> plugins immediately :-) ) >> >> Vote open for 72H. >> >> [+1] Move to git scm >> [0] No interest >> [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) >> >> >> Thanks, >> -- >> Olivier Lamy >> Talend: http://coders.talend.com >> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >> > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Git as the canonical SCM
Has anyone stopped to ask any other projects (both apache and non-apache) who have done what is being proposed here: - How they found it? - What did they do well? - What did they do poorly? - What pain points did they have? - What would they do differently, if they had to do it again? - What benefits did they receive? - Did the expected benfits match the results? (just to name a few questions off of the top of my head, I'm sure that there are others). Effectively, a PIR of a project that has already gone this route. The fact that a lot of people have said +1 and there are still discussions around how to best set up a repo, means to me, that there is lots more room for dissussion. -Chris On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 3:30 PM, David Jencks wrote: > > On Sep 5, 2012, at 10:08 PM, Kristian Rosenvold wrote: > > > 2012/9/5 Romain Manni-Bucau : > >> Last note: i think the plugin you speak about (create a kind of virtual > >> project) will be a nightmare. Scm are nice but can be broken and when > you > >> dont have a 1:1 with remote repo it is even harder > > > > I would really like some elaboration on this, since I'm not sure I > > understand what > > you're trying to say. I work with the maven codebase > > all the time and I generally find working with layered components that > are > > from different release modules to be a little painful although > > manageable. Most of this pain does > > /not/ stem from the fact that they are in different version control > systems > > or different checkouts from the version control system (which they are). > > I think from my experience that your proposed plugin is sort of essential > for working with maven code. I usually give up quickly because I can't > find all the dependencies that some plugin I want to improve uses in a > finite amount of time. > > However, I wonder how useful it will be on projects with more separation > between interface and implementation, as in some osgi projects. If you > have a module AIntf with interfaces and then the implementations in AImpl > and project B uses AIntf how do you know to check out AImpl? (or the > several AImpls). I'd love to see this work > > > > > I like to think there are a few main use cases for checking out code: > > A) I want to fix a single problem/issue and when I'm done with that > > I'm going to submit a patch and get on with my life. > > B) I'm hooked. I fix things in a limited subset of the code base all > > the time. So I need to keep it recent, fresh and patched. > > C) I'm all over the place. I do global updates to dependencies and > > reformat code like there's no tomorrow. > > > > I think these are the three models we need to support well. I think > > especially A is important, since it's the > > gateway to entry ;) > > I like this division. > > And BTW as a very occasional maven patcher and git user elsewhere I think > git would be an improvement over svn. > > thanks! > david jencks > > > > > Kristian > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >
Re: Git as the canonical SCM
On Sep 5, 2012, at 10:08 PM, Kristian Rosenvold wrote: > 2012/9/5 Romain Manni-Bucau : >> Last note: i think the plugin you speak about (create a kind of virtual >> project) will be a nightmare. Scm are nice but can be broken and when you >> dont have a 1:1 with remote repo it is even harder > > I would really like some elaboration on this, since I'm not sure I > understand what > you're trying to say. I work with the maven codebase > all the time and I generally find working with layered components that are > from different release modules to be a little painful although > manageable. Most of this pain does > /not/ stem from the fact that they are in different version control systems > or different checkouts from the version control system (which they are). I think from my experience that your proposed plugin is sort of essential for working with maven code. I usually give up quickly because I can't find all the dependencies that some plugin I want to improve uses in a finite amount of time. However, I wonder how useful it will be on projects with more separation between interface and implementation, as in some osgi projects. If you have a module AIntf with interfaces and then the implementations in AImpl and project B uses AIntf how do you know to check out AImpl? (or the several AImpls). I'd love to see this work > > I like to think there are a few main use cases for checking out code: > A) I want to fix a single problem/issue and when I'm done with that > I'm going to submit a patch and get on with my life. > B) I'm hooked. I fix things in a limited subset of the code base all > the time. So I need to keep it recent, fresh and patched. > C) I'm all over the place. I do global updates to dependencies and > reformat code like there's no tomorrow. > > I think these are the three models we need to support well. I think > especially A is important, since it's the > gateway to entry ;) I like this division. And BTW as a very occasional maven patcher and git user elsewhere I think git would be an improvement over svn. thanks! david jencks > > Kristian > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Git as the canonical SCM
2012/9/5 Romain Manni-Bucau : > Last note: i think the plugin you speak about (create a kind of virtual > project) will be a nightmare. Scm are nice but can be broken and when you > dont have a 1:1 with remote repo it is even harder I would really like some elaboration on this, since I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say. I work with the maven codebase all the time and I generally find working with layered components that are from different release modules to be a little painful although manageable. Most of this pain does /not/ stem from the fact that they are in different version control systems or different checkouts from the version control system (which they are). I like to think there are a few main use cases for checking out code: A) I want to fix a single problem/issue and when I'm done with that I'm going to submit a patch and get on with my life. B) I'm hooked. I fix things in a limited subset of the code base all the time. So I need to keep it recent, fresh and patched. C) I'm all over the place. I do global updates to dependencies and reformat code like there's no tomorrow. I think these are the three models we need to support well. I think especially A is important, since it's the gateway to entry ;) Kristian - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
+0.5 if it makes devs or patchers lives easier No time to help, and I'd like to see a clearer understanding of how we'll convert non-t/b/t-layout repos before we end up with 50 repositories as others have said. BTW, if anyone is looking at doing that, I found the svn2git worked well for filtering, without having to resort to an svndumpfilter first (I believe it even addresses "moves from outside of the subtree's history"). - Brett On 05/09/2012, at 4:04 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote: > Hi, > This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one > svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). > First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra > for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if you > are volunteer you must say that with your vote). > The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the > minimum of 3 volunteers ! > BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! > The vote will decide on moving all the source tree (volunteers time > will the main throttle). > > Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on dev@ is mandatory). > The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, indexer,core, > wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with > plugins immediately :-) ) > > Vote open for 72H. > > [+1] Move to git scm > [0] No interest > [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) > > > Thanks, > -- > Olivier Lamy > Talend: http://coders.talend.com > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
RE: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
+1 I/we can volunteer. > -Original Message- > From: Stephane Nicoll [mailto:stephane.nic...@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2012 9:21 > To: Maven Developers List > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git > > +0 > > S. > > On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 1:04 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote: > > Hi, > > This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently > located in one > > svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). > > First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on > Apache infra > > for this move and more generally on git Apache > infrastructure. (if you > > are volunteer you must say that with your vote). > > The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the > > minimum of 3 volunteers ! > > BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! > > The vote will decide on moving all the source tree > (volunteers time > > will the main throttle). > > > > Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on > dev@ is mandatory). > > The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, > indexer,core, > > wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with > > plugins immediately :-) ) > > > > Vote open for 72H. > > > > [+1] Move to git scm > > [0] No interest > > [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) > > > > > > Thanks, > > -- -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- - - - Jason Pyeron PD Inc. http://www.pdinc.us - - Principal Consultant 10 West 24th Street #100- - +1 (443) 269-1555 x333Baltimore, Maryland 21218 - - - -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- This message is copyright PD Inc, subject to license 20080407P00. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
I knew someone would misread that. I was not referring to anyone on this list. People on this list are at the pointy end of the stick, although we have a spread of abilities, most are in the upper end of the scale. The reason for this is simple. It's because to do it because we like it, a passion as it were. And that's when you see people at their best. Even with differences of opinion (and experience) such as this. Compare this with the corporate world in which I work. In the quest for the immortal dollar, the bar is being LOWERED, not raised. The average skill level of people is stunningly low. Believe it or not, I _STILL_ have arguments with people as to whether people need to check things in or not. And how to check in, and that you DO need to do an update first, before you commit, and not delete the dir in SVN and then add everything afresh (thus wiping out other people's changes). Sad but true. In this day and age. I was referring 'people of questionable parentage' from my previous project. Several vendors did not have any SCM at all. Fine, give them Hg. But don't force those with mature processes in place to change. Especially when no one has any skills or experience in Hg/git on how/why/etc to set up and manage multiple repos. Even those who were experienced in using GIT, they ended up with hundreds of repos, and it became a real mess to manage. Oh, and stop stupid things like checking built binaries into repos... As robert points out, it's not just the technical reasons for a change that need to be considered, there are all of the other reasons, training, knowledge, support etc that also need to be considered. As someone else points out, if CVS still works for you, fine, stick with it. So, I have a broader view of SCM usage. It's not just the tool being used, it *must* encompass HOW it is to be used. -Chris (who is clearly wearing his SCM hat today... :-) ) On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 11:24 PM, Benson Margulies wrote: > Chris, > > Just whom amongst us are you labeling 'a few immature devs'? > > Many of us here have been using both git and svn, extensively, for > years now, and have a preference for git based on plenty of practical > experience. While git is new-ish at the ASF, it's official, and a > growing list of projects are using it > > Many of the, ahem, outboard components of Maven are in git already. > > Speaking for myself, I've used svn, I've used 'git svn', and I've used > git. Plenty. And it's my considered judgement that git would be better > for this project, and I voted as such. Please don't cast asparagus on > my by indirectly calling me a cultist. > > --benson > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >
Re: [VOTE] Maven SCM 1.8
Let me drag out the Jazz SCM VM to see that it still works. -Chris On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 3:50 AM, Mark Struberg wrote: > +1 > > LieGrue, > strub > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: Olivier Lamy > > To: Maven Developers List > > Cc: > > Sent: Wednesday, September 5, 2012 2:46 PM > > Subject: [VOTE] Maven SCM 1.8 > > > > Hi, > > I'd like to release Apache Maven Scm 1.8. > > We fixed 10 issues: > > > http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10527&version=18444 > > > > Staging repository: > > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-037/ > > Staging site: http://maven.apache.org/scm-1.8/ > > > > Vote open for 72H > > [+1] > > [0] > > [-1] > > > > Thanks, > > -- > > Olivier Lamy > > Talend: http://coders.talend.com > > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >
Re: [VOTE] Apache Maven Install plugin 2.4
+1 Hervé Le lundi 3 septembre 2012 22:29:36 Olivier Lamy a écrit : > Hi, > I'd like to release Maven Install plugin 2.4 > > We fixed 5 issues: > https://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=15112&styleName=Te > xt&projectId=11136 Staging repository: > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-031/ > Staging site: http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-install-plugin-2.4/ > (wait sync or have a look here > http://maventest.apache.org/plugins/maven-install-plugin-2.4/) > > Guide to testing staged releases: > http://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html > > Vote open for 72 hours. > > [ ] +1 > [ ] +0 > [ ] -1 > > > Thanks - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
If we applied the same logic back in 2004, we would still be on CVS. Personally, I think Git affords us a lot of opportunity to streamline the contribution process and a much cleaner way of working (patching, rebasing, local branches, etc.) I've switched to Git for all of the rest of what I do, and I have to say that even with the tooling still just maturing even now, Git is far-and-away easier to use. I spend a lot less time juggling working directories, generating patches just to back out something I'm working on at the moment to switch gears for a bugfix, and accepting contributions from anyone is straightforward (especially compared to SVN). I think the world is well beyond simply jumping on the bandwagon with Git; it works well and enables new forms of interaction with the community. We're actually trailing the field by waiting until now to move. I think it's probably prudent, given the size of Maven (and ASF more generally), but we're definitely not riding the cutting edge here. On 9/5/12 8:05 AM, Chris Graham wrote: It's not a matter of thinking that git is like SVN at all. It's the exact opposite in fact; they are different, to the extent that it entails a whole new approach. We have a well resourced, well understood, well supported tool and mature practices with our current SVN. All I am saying is that we really should stop and think as to whether we want to throw that out. I, personally am not convinced. At the end of the day, it's more about WHAT we produce (maven, plugins etc) than the TOOLS (SVN, git, etc) we use. For those who want to use git, fine stick with git SVN, but don't force me to learn a new tool; I do enough of that already. (and I've just come from a project where the personal preferences of a few immature devs forced the abandonment of good mature practices and had Hg shoved down our throats; and this is a $40 Billion dollar company, let's not make the same mistake here). -Chris Sent from my iPhone On 05/09/2012, at 9:41 PM, Arnaud Héritier wrote: I think Olivier already replied to some points given few points where Git is really interesting : performances, branches management .. But yes there are skills to learn, it's not easy and the error is to think that Git is like SVN But it may be an opportunity to learn ? On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Chris Graham wrote: -1 Non binding. I have no desire to setup and learn new tools for no clearly apparent advantages. There appears to be multitude of ways that DSCM's can be configured. I'm not sure if sufficient thought/discussion has been given to the way in which it should/can be set up. Where it is to be hosted? My view: Move got a good reason. A fad is not a good reason. -Chris On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 9:25 PM, Stephen Connolly < stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: +1. Have no spare time ATM, so cannot volunteer even if I would love to On 5 September 2012 12:04, Olivier Lamy wrote: Hi, This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if you are volunteer you must say that with your vote). The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the minimum of 3 volunteers ! BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! The vote will decide on moving all the source tree (volunteers time will the main throttle). Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on dev@ is mandatory). The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, indexer,core, wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with plugins immediately :-) ) Vote open for 72H. [+1] Move to git scm [0] No interest [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) Thanks, -- Olivier Lamy Talend: http://coders.talend.com http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org -- - Arnaud Héritier 06-89-76-64-24 http://aheritier.net Mail/GTalk: aherit...@gmail.com Twitter/Skype : aheritier - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org -- John Casey Developer, PMC Member - Apache Maven (http://maven.apache.org) GitHub - http://github.com/jdcasey - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
+1 but have no time to volunteer at the moment. On 9/5/12 6:04 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote: Hi, This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if you are volunteer you must say that with your vote). The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the minimum of 3 volunteers ! BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! The vote will decide on moving all the source tree (volunteers time will the main throttle). Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on dev@ is mandatory). The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, indexer,core, wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with plugins immediately :-) ) Vote open for 72H. [+1] Move to git scm [0] No interest [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) Thanks, -- John Casey Developer, PMC Member - Apache Maven (http://maven.apache.org) GitHub - http://github.com/jdcasey - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 8:34 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote: > [+1] Move to git scm > [0] No interest > [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) +1 (binding) No capacity for volunteering to help :( - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
maven-enforcer pull request: New enforcer for environment variables
Github user velo closed the pull request at: https://github.com/apache/maven-enforcer/pull/3 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
"No-one is using cvs anymore." That's a wrong assumption, sad but true. I still know companies which haven't invested in moving forward to a new versioning system, because CVS still works good enough. Investments is not only about the hardware and the investigation, preparation and execution of the migration of repositories, but also about the education of the users, for several reasons. -Robert Op Wed, 05 Sep 2012 14:19:31 +0200 schreef Kristian Rosenvold : The hosting bit is defined in context of apache, there is not much we need to do in that respect. This dusussion has been on/off for quite a few years, so I'm not entirely surprised if you haven't seen it all. As for "fad", I'm old enough to believe that version control systems have their "epochs". No-one is using cvs anymore. This seems to be the decade of git; I'm sure something new & shiney will pop up in a few years time. Kristian 2012/9/5 Chris Graham : -1 Non binding. I have no desire to setup and learn new tools for no clearly apparent advantages. There appears to be multitude of ways that DSCM's can be configured. I'm not sure if sufficient thought/discussion has been given to the way in which it should/can be set up. Where it is to be hosted? My view: Move got a good reason. A fad is not a good reason. -Chris On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 9:25 PM, Stephen Connolly < stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: +1. Have no spare time ATM, so cannot volunteer even if I would love to On 5 September 2012 12:04, Olivier Lamy wrote: > Hi, > This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one > svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). > First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra > for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if you > are volunteer you must say that with your vote). > The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the > minimum of 3 volunteers ! > BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! > The vote will decide on moving all the source tree (volunteers time > will the main throttle). > > Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on dev@ is > mandatory). > The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, indexer,core, > wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with > plugins immediately :-) ) > > Vote open for 72H. > > [+1] Move to git scm > [0] No interest > [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) > > > Thanks, > -- > Olivier Lamy > Talend: http://coders.talend.com > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Git as the canonical SCM
Im not a mvn community member but use if everyday and would like to share my thought about this thread: "don't make sthg trivial hard" Git is awesome for the purpose it was created. In this thread there are several issues not all linked to the scm Last note: i think the plugin you speak about (create a kind of virtual project) will be a nightmare. Scm are nice but can be broken and when you dont have a 1:1 with remote repo it is even harder Just my thoughts... Le 5 sept. 2012 20:54, "Kristian Rosenvold" a écrit : > 2012/9/5 Mark Struberg : > > Well, I consider myself a git black-belt user as well (I even wrote > parts of the german man pages). > I know you are ;) > > > Let's just consider we will abandon some old plugin because we replaced > it with a much better approach. In SVN you just create a branch for > maintenance and delete the plugin from trunk. Nobody will see this obsolete > plugin if he checks out the trunk. But in GIT you still have the repo > around. And for knowing which ones are in use and which aren't anymore you > would need to clone all of them. > > > > There are 2 use cases when maintaining plugins: > > 1.) a plugin specific fix > > 2.) a cross-cutting fix which concerns many plugins (upgrade of > technologies, introducing a new pattern, etc) > > > > Especially for 2.) it would become _much_ harder to do this properly as > you cannot easily make sure that you checked all plugins! > > I think the concerns you raise are legit and reasonable, but a switch > also opens a lot of new posssibilities. > > You seem to be assuming we keep everything else as-is and not change > too much documentation or the way we document stuff? As I mentioned > earlier today, make a plugin that checks out the entire dependency > tree and create a project for you. Or how about something as brutally > simple as a large page of "git clone" statements lined up in a > copy-pasteable manner that will clone every single repo in the > codebase nicely side by side? We could even make a plugin to do it and > auto-generate a pom.xml that'll load everything ;) The plugin that > checks out the entire depth of the dependency sources could offer to > roll all checked out dependencies to snapshot mode to facilitate > super-easy access to making changes across the board[I seem to be > boling with different ideas in this topic today] > > You also seem to be assuming that the current svn setup is easy for > users wishing to take a simple dive into some bug they want to fix or > some feature they want to add. I'll add my 5c that the current > dependency structure in maven (and high modularization) has you in a > hell-hole of checkouts long before you even *reach* the plexus-jungle. > I remember this very clearly from the first time I started checking > out maven sources. There's no end to the stuff, and it's not easily > accessible to a beginner. > > Of course, now I'm familiar with the jungle ;) > > Kristian > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >
Re: Git as the canonical SCM
2012/9/5 Mark Struberg : > Well, I consider myself a git black-belt user as well (I even wrote parts of > the german man pages). I know you are ;) > Let's just consider we will abandon some old plugin because we replaced it > with a much better approach. In SVN you just create a branch for maintenance > and delete the plugin from trunk. Nobody will see this obsolete plugin if he > checks out the trunk. But in GIT you still have the repo around. And for > knowing which ones are in use and which aren't anymore you would need to > clone all of them. > > There are 2 use cases when maintaining plugins: > 1.) a plugin specific fix > 2.) a cross-cutting fix which concerns many plugins (upgrade of technologies, > introducing a new pattern, etc) > > Especially for 2.) it would become _much_ harder to do this properly as you > cannot easily make sure that you checked all plugins! I think the concerns you raise are legit and reasonable, but a switch also opens a lot of new posssibilities. You seem to be assuming we keep everything else as-is and not change too much documentation or the way we document stuff? As I mentioned earlier today, make a plugin that checks out the entire dependency tree and create a project for you. Or how about something as brutally simple as a large page of "git clone" statements lined up in a copy-pasteable manner that will clone every single repo in the codebase nicely side by side? We could even make a plugin to do it and auto-generate a pom.xml that'll load everything ;) The plugin that checks out the entire depth of the dependency sources could offer to roll all checked out dependencies to snapshot mode to facilitate super-easy access to making changes across the board[I seem to be boling with different ideas in this topic today] You also seem to be assuming that the current svn setup is easy for users wishing to take a simple dive into some bug they want to fix or some feature they want to add. I'll add my 5c that the current dependency structure in maven (and high modularization) has you in a hell-hole of checkouts long before you even *reach* the plexus-jungle. I remember this very clearly from the first time I started checking out maven sources. There's no end to the stuff, and it's not easily accessible to a beginner. Of course, now I'm familiar with the jungle ;) Kristian - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
+1 non binding In terms of learning more about git, there are a LOT of free resources available including books and other documentation as well as things like live office hours at github and so on. GitHub is also open sourcing all their training material so there will be more as well.. and lots of it is around git concepts and not github specifics. A small word of warning though.. once you have learned git and enjoyed the benefits you will feel bad whenever you use another version control system. manfred On Wed, September 5, 2012 4:41 am, Arnaud Héritier wrote: > I think Olivier already replied to some points given few points where Git > is really interesting : performances, branches management .. > But yes there are skills to learn, it's not easy and the error is to think > that Git is like SVN > But it may be an opportunity to learn ? > > On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Chris Graham wrote: > >> -1 Non binding. >> >> I have no desire to setup and learn new tools for no clearly apparent >> advantages. >> There appears to be multitude of ways that DSCM's can be configured. I'm >> not sure if sufficient thought/discussion has been given to the way in >> which it should/can be set up. >> Where it is to be hosted? >> >> My view: Move got a good reason. A fad is not a good reason. >> >> -Chris >> >> On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 9:25 PM, Stephen Connolly < >> stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > +1. Have no spare time ATM, so cannot volunteer even if I would love >> to >> > >> > On 5 September 2012 12:04, Olivier Lamy wrote: >> > >> > > Hi, >> > > This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in >> one >> > > svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). >> > > First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra >> > > for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if >> you >> > > are volunteer you must say that with your vote). >> > > The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the >> > > minimum of 3 volunteers ! >> > > BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! >> > > The vote will decide on moving all the source tree (volunteers time >> > > will the main throttle). >> > > >> > > Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on dev@ is >> > > mandatory). >> > > The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, >> indexer,core, >> > > wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with >> > > plugins immediately :-) ) >> > > >> > > Vote open for 72H. >> > > >> > > [+1] Move to git scm >> > > [0] No interest >> > > [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) >> > > >> > > >> > > Thanks, >> > > -- >> > > Olivier Lamy >> > > Talend: http://coders.talend.com >> > > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy >> > > >> > > - >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >> > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > -- > - > Arnaud Héritier > 06-89-76-64-24 > http://aheritier.net > Mail/GTalk: aherit...@gmail.com > Twitter/Skype : aheritier > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Maven SCM 1.8
+1 LieGrue, strub - Original Message - > From: Olivier Lamy > To: Maven Developers List > Cc: > Sent: Wednesday, September 5, 2012 2:46 PM > Subject: [VOTE] Maven SCM 1.8 > > Hi, > I'd like to release Apache Maven Scm 1.8. > We fixed 10 issues: > http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10527&version=18444 > > Staging repository: > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-037/ > Staging site: http://maven.apache.org/scm-1.8/ > > Vote open for 72H > [+1] > [0] > [-1] > > Thanks, > -- > Olivier Lamy > Talend: http://coders.talend.com > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Git as the canonical SCM
Well, I consider myself a git black-belt user as well (I even wrote parts of the german man pages). But the problems I explained mostly happens to users which do not have that much GIT foo. It's just pretty easy to mess up a repo with git pull (especially when using --rebase or core.autorebase=true) Anyway, my main concern is how to effectively slice up the repos without having tons of unnecessary repos lying around at the end of the day. Because that is exactly what happened to a few projects I know! Let's just consider we will abandon some old plugin because we replaced it with a much better approach. In SVN you just create a branch for maintenance and delete the plugin from trunk. Nobody will see this obsolete plugin if he checks out the trunk. But in GIT you still have the repo around. And for knowing which ones are in use and which aren't anymore you would need to clone all of them. There are 2 use cases when maintaining plugins: 1.) a plugin specific fix 2.) a cross-cutting fix which concerns many plugins (upgrade of technologies, introducing a new pattern, etc) Especially for 2.) it would become _much_ harder to do this properly as you cannot easily make sure that you checked all plugins! LieGrue, strub - Original Message - > From: Kristian Rosenvold > To: Maven Developers List ; Mark Struberg > > Cc: > Sent: Wednesday, September 5, 2012 2:32 PM > Subject: Re: Git as the canonical SCM > > While I'm sure it's academically interesting, I'm not sure if this > discussion is all that relevant for practical purposes. We > adapt/optimize for the technologies we use, and in moving to git I'm > quite convinced anything other than 1 release unit = 1 repo is > suboptimal. All the chit-chat about sparse checkouts is basically how > to live with suboptimal repos, and there is really no good reason why > we should choose to do that. > > As for your considerations on mixed merge/rebase workflows, you're > describing some hard cases that are quite far from beginners workflow > that require decent understanding of how things work. I work daily > with multiple remotes (apache/github) merges and rebases and I hardly > even think about it. But then again I'm probably a black belt user. > I'm not going to scare off beginners about the wonders of rebasing > merge commits because it is a problem they shouldnt be running into. > > Kristian > > 2012/9/5 Mark Struberg : >>> No longer true, git has sparse checkout support (I believe since > 1.7.0). >> >> I hear this argument over and over again, and it is still wrong! >> >> >> The sparse checkout support is only fragmentaric at least! It's for > sure not comparable with the sparse checkout features of SVN. I'd rather > call it 'farce checkout' :) >> >> Try creating a sparse branch >> Try creating a sparse tag >> Try getting multiple sparse checkouts at the same time >> >> >> git is good, but it it's basic design decisions does not fit to all > project setups. >> E.g. GIT is still primarily intended for only pushing to your own repo. Try > to do a git merge and later rebase of a concurring merge conflict. You will > end > up with all commits duplicated in the history... >> >> LieGrue, >> strub >> >> >> >> - Original Message - >>> From: Stanislav Ochotnicky >>> To: Maven Developers List >>> Cc: >>> Sent: Wednesday, September 5, 2012 9:51 AM >>> Subject: Re: Git as the canonical SCM >>> >>> Quoting Olivier Lamy (2012-09-04 22:23:11) >>> ... Due to lack of support of sparse checkout in git, I (perso) > don't want we have to create a git repo per plugin etc... IMHO That will be a pain to manage. >>> >>> No longer true, git has sparse checkout support (I believe since > 1.7.0). >>> See http://git-scm.com/docs/git-read-tree.html (search for Sparse >>> checkout section). There are multiple examples spread through the >>> interwebs, one would be: >>> > http://jasonkarns.com/blog/subdirectory-checkouts-with-git-sparse-checkout/ >>> >>> And there's always shallow clones which are fine for sending >>> format-patch(es). >>> >>> That said, the code should IMHO be split into repositories depending on >>> their releases (i.e. code that gets releases simultaneously should be > in >>> one repo, code that has multiple parts which get their own release tags >>> should be in separate repos) >>> >>> -- >>> Stanislav Ochotnicky >>> Software Engineer - Base Operating Systems Brno >>> >>> PGP: 7B087241 >>> Red Hat Inc. http://cz.redhat.com >>> >>> - >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >>> >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
+1 -- Regards, Igor On 12-09-05 7:04 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote: Hi, This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if you are volunteer you must say that with your vote). The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the minimum of 3 volunteers ! BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! The vote will decide on moving all the source tree (volunteers time will the main throttle). Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on dev@ is mandatory). The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, indexer,core, wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with plugins immediately :-) ) Vote open for 72H. [+1] Move to git scm [0] No interest [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) Thanks, - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
2012/9/5 Kristian Rosenvold : > We only move things we are satisfied with. But we don't vote on each > item unless there turns out to be some real issues to solve. > Most of the maven projects already have excellent git repositories at > http://git.apache.org/, Note: current ASF projects using git as canonical scm are located here: https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf > for these it's just a modified "scm" url and the flip of a switch or two. > > So there's basically only a few cases to be solved. Luckily we have > good repos to use as starting point for some > hard-core filter-branch/relocation stuff. I was planning to do this > for codehaus a year ago, I suspect I can use the scripts > I'd make for this at @haus too. > > Kristian > > > 2012/9/5 Daniel Kulp : >> >> I'm +0.5 on everything that currently has the trunk/tags/branches setup in >> SVN. >> >> -1 on things that are not setup that way right now until more discussions >> and agreement can be made on how that should be approached. >> >> Really, I think we should just do Maven core and maybe one or two other >> simple ones for now and see how that goes. If that goes well over then >> next 3 months or so, expand a little more. >> >> Dan >> >> >> >> On Sep 5, 2012, at 7:04 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one >>> svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). >>> First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra >>> for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if you >>> are volunteer you must say that with your vote). >>> The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the >>> minimum of 3 volunteers ! >>> BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! >>> The vote will decide on moving all the source tree (volunteers time >>> will the main throttle). >>> >>> Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on dev@ is >>> mandatory). >>> The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, indexer,core, >>> wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with >>> plugins immediately :-) ) >>> >>> Vote open for 72H. >>> >>> [+1] Move to git scm >>> [0] No interest >>> [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> -- >>> Olivier Lamy >>> Talend: http://coders.talend.com >>> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy >>> >>> - >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >>> >> >> -- >> Daniel Kulp >> dk...@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog >> Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com >> >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >> > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > -- Olivier Lamy Talend: http://coders.talend.com http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
We only move things we are satisfied with. But we don't vote on each item unless there turns out to be some real issues to solve. Most of the maven projects already have excellent git repositories at http://git.apache.org/, for these it's just a modified "scm" url and the flip of a switch or two. So there's basically only a few cases to be solved. Luckily we have good repos to use as starting point for some hard-core filter-branch/relocation stuff. I was planning to do this for codehaus a year ago, I suspect I can use the scripts I'd make for this at @haus too. Kristian 2012/9/5 Daniel Kulp : > > I'm +0.5 on everything that currently has the trunk/tags/branches setup in > SVN. > > -1 on things that are not setup that way right now until more discussions and > agreement can be made on how that should be approached. > > Really, I think we should just do Maven core and maybe one or two other > simple ones for now and see how that goes. If that goes well over then next > 3 months or so, expand a little more. > > Dan > > > > On Sep 5, 2012, at 7:04 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote: > >> Hi, >> This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one >> svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). >> First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra >> for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if you >> are volunteer you must say that with your vote). >> The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the >> minimum of 3 volunteers ! >> BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! >> The vote will decide on moving all the source tree (volunteers time >> will the main throttle). >> >> Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on dev@ is mandatory). >> The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, indexer,core, >> wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with >> plugins immediately :-) ) >> >> Vote open for 72H. >> >> [+1] Move to git scm >> [0] No interest >> [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) >> >> >> Thanks, >> -- >> Olivier Lamy >> Talend: http://coders.talend.com >> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >> > > -- > Daniel Kulp > dk...@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog > Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
[ETA] Sites on svnpubsub
Hi Folks, First reminder, moving site and distribution to svnpubsub is mandatory for the end of the year (the good is dist and sync are very very fast opposite to the current rsync process) As you remember, Hervé started some times ago a test site http://maventest.apache.org which is a mix of cms and simple svnpubsub tru the plugin maven-scm-publish-plugin [1]. I have recently work a bit on that and tested/improved a bit the plugin (kudo to Hervé and Benson for starting that !). Note it works on svn and git (including gh-pages github feature). I have tested that on other Apache projects (direct memory.a.o and archiva.a.o) and I think it works fine. Feel free to have a look at the documentation. My goal is to release this plugin around next week (that's why I started a scm release first as I need some fixes/features). Then I have finished importing all of the content to http://maventest.apache.org . At this point we are ok to switch to svnpubsub for sites too. BTW we will have to document more the procedure when releasing a plugin/component/project. Any questions/comments are really welcome. Thanks, -- Olivier Lamy Talend: http://coders.talend.com http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy [1] http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-scm-publish-plugin/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
I'm +0.5 on everything that currently has the trunk/tags/branches setup in SVN. -1 on things that are not setup that way right now until more discussions and agreement can be made on how that should be approached. Really, I think we should just do Maven core and maybe one or two other simple ones for now and see how that goes. If that goes well over then next 3 months or so, expand a little more. Dan On Sep 5, 2012, at 7:04 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote: > Hi, > This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one > svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). > First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra > for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if you > are volunteer you must say that with your vote). > The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the > minimum of 3 volunteers ! > BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! > The vote will decide on moving all the source tree (volunteers time > will the main throttle). > > Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on dev@ is mandatory). > The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, indexer,core, > wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with > plugins immediately :-) ) > > Vote open for 72H. > > [+1] Move to git scm > [0] No interest > [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) > > > Thanks, > -- > Olivier Lamy > Talend: http://coders.talend.com > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > -- Daniel Kulp dk...@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
2012/9/5 Chris Graham : > It's not a matter of thinking that git is like SVN at all. > > It's the exact opposite in fact; they are different, to the extent that it > entails a whole new approach. > > We have a well resourced, well understood, well supported tool and mature > practices with our current SVN. > > All I am saying is that we really should stop and think as to whether we want > to throw that out. I, personally am not convinced. > > At the end of the day, it's more about WHAT we produce (maven, plugins etc) > than the TOOLS (SVN, git, etc) we use. > > For those who want to use git, fine stick with git SVN, but don't force me to > learn a new tool; I do enough of that already. (and I've just come from a > project where the personal preferences of a few immature devs forced the > abandonment of good mature practices and had Hg shoved down our throats; and > this is a $40 Billion dollar company, let's not make the same mistake here). Sorry for that. But (perso) I use git on some projects and I find it fine. Moving from svn to git is a bit simple (just some commands to replace). BTW We will have to document some basic stuff (replace the page http://maven.apache.org/developers/conventions/svn.html with common useful git commands) > > -Chris > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 05/09/2012, at 9:41 PM, Arnaud Héritier wrote: > >> I think Olivier already replied to some points given few points where Git >> is really interesting : performances, branches management .. >> But yes there are skills to learn, it's not easy and the error is to think >> that Git is like SVN >> But it may be an opportunity to learn ? >> >> On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Chris Graham wrote: >> >>> -1 Non binding. >>> >>> I have no desire to setup and learn new tools for no clearly apparent >>> advantages. >>> There appears to be multitude of ways that DSCM's can be configured. I'm >>> not sure if sufficient thought/discussion has been given to the way in >>> which it should/can be set up. >>> Where it is to be hosted? >>> >>> My view: Move got a good reason. A fad is not a good reason. >>> >>> -Chris >>> >>> On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 9:25 PM, Stephen Connolly < >>> stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> +1. Have no spare time ATM, so cannot volunteer even if I would love to On 5 September 2012 12:04, Olivier Lamy wrote: > Hi, > This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one > svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). > First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra > for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if you > are volunteer you must say that with your vote). > The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the > minimum of 3 volunteers ! > BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! > The vote will decide on moving all the source tree (volunteers time > will the main throttle). > > Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on dev@ is > mandatory). > The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, indexer,core, > wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with > plugins immediately :-) ) > > Vote open for 72H. > > [+1] Move to git scm > [0] No interest > [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) > > > Thanks, > -- > Olivier Lamy > Talend: http://coders.talend.com > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> - >> Arnaud Héritier >> 06-89-76-64-24 >> http://aheritier.net >> Mail/GTalk: aherit...@gmail.com >> Twitter/Skype : aheritier > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > -- Olivier Lamy Talend: http://coders.talend.com http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
Chris, Just whom amongst us are you labeling 'a few immature devs'? Many of us here have been using both git and svn, extensively, for years now, and have a preference for git based on plenty of practical experience. While git is new-ish at the ASF, it's official, and a growing list of projects are using it Many of the, ahem, outboard components of Maven are in git already. Speaking for myself, I've used svn, I've used 'git svn', and I've used git. Plenty. And it's my considered judgement that git would be better for this project, and I voted as such. Please don't cast asparagus on my by indirectly calling me a cultist. --benson - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Git as the canonical SCM
+1 All reasonable, and we can certainly try it with a few repos people are interested. On Sep 5, 2012, at 3:31 AM, Kristian Rosenvold wrote: > I think we should move to git; probably starting with a few > repositories. I will not go into the argument as to why (it's been > covered like a zillion times, link by Andrew covers a lot of it), > other than to mention that the immense ease of moving around in > history means that I never have to consider a patch "stale" since I > can easily review it at the point in history it was created; > additionally there's a much-improved chance I can move this to the top > of history without being stale) > > Basically I've been meaning to start av vote suggesting that we: > > 1) Decide to move *all* maven projects to git, time frame subject to > project/asf/infra capacity. We're in no immense hurry. > 2) Kick off the effort by moving 2-3 projects initially, 1-2 easy ones > (just to get the general feel for how things work) and a hard one. > Right now I'd suggest something like m3-core, surefire( or scm) and > maven-plugins, the last being the hard one ;) > > I herby volunteer to do the donkey-work, including some massive > filter-branch operations on the current asf maven-plugins git clone. > > I think we should split maven-plugins, because I think the solution > chosen is optimized for the wrong uses cases, and it only helps for > setting up CI jobs. The rest of the community basically has no value > in the current set-up. > > Which makes me think we should consider such a switch an opportunity > to re-think some of our tooling > around multi-module projects. What the 99% others want (who're not > setting up a CI) is a checkout algorithm that builds the *vertical* > stack for a given plugin, not the horizontal top-level stack for all > the plugins (which is what we have currently). So if I checkout > "maven-ear-plugin", I would basically want something like this: > root-dir\ > maven-ear-plugin\ > maven-archiver\ > maven-filtering\ > plexus-archiver\ > plexus-utils > .. maybe more.. (probably configurable somewhere) > > Now if the checkout would generate a synethetic parent pom with all > these as modules, I could just load it all up in IDEA and be ready to > go. I think something like this would have /real/ value to most of our > users, whereas the current maven-plugins layout really only is > valuable for whoever is configuring a CI to build maven-plugins. > > No matter what, I think there's very lfew practical use cases for > having all the modules chunked together. > > Kristian > > > 2012/9/4 Olivier Lamy : >> 2012/9/4 Andrew Waterman : >>> The drools guys did a really nice move from Subversion a few years back. >>> >>> http://blog.athico.com/2010/12/drools-migrated-to-git.html >>> >>> One of the key things they did, was reorganize their poms and project >>> structure. >>> >>> I'd be willing to help out. I think there could be a lot more to this move >>> than just importing from subversion, but it depends on what you guys want >>> to do. >> >> Yup I agree. >> I use git on other oss projects (Apache: cloudstack and non Apache: >> jenkins ...) and git svn for some asf projects. >> Due to lack of support of sparse checkout in git, I (perso) don't want >> we have to create a git repo per plugin etc... >> IMHO That will be a pain to manage. >> >>> >>> best wishes, >>> >>> Andrew >>> >>> On Sep 4, 2012, at 3:09 PM, "Jason Pyeron" wrote: >>> > -Original Message- > From: Jason van Zyl > Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2012 15:55 > > How's Git doing at Apache these days? > > Anyone interested in pursuing putting Maven in Git as the > canonical SCM? Comments from the peanut gallery: It would make it very nice to contribute back. Since I do not have a sandbox access I have thrown away fixes because there was no efficient way to track them until they were accepted as patches. (same problem in struts, commons, ...) We would be very happy here at PD Inc if that was done. -Jason Pyeron -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- - - - Jason Pyeron PD Inc. http://www.pdinc.us - - Principal Consultant 10 West 24th Street #100- - +1 (443) 269-1555 x333Baltimore, Maryland 21218 - - - -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- This message is copyright PD Inc, subject to license 20080407P00. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Olivier Lamy >> Talend: http://coders.talend.com >
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
+0 S. On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 1:04 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote: > Hi, > This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one > svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). > First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra > for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if you > are volunteer you must say that with your vote). > The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the > minimum of 3 volunteers ! > BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! > The vote will decide on moving all the source tree (volunteers time > will the main throttle). > > Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on dev@ is mandatory). > The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, indexer,core, > wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with > plugins immediately :-) ) > > Vote open for 72H. > > [+1] Move to git scm > [0] No interest > [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) > > > Thanks, > -- > Olivier Lamy > Talend: http://coders.talend.com > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Place to build a plan for arranging ourselves in git
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Scheme+for+managing+Maven+source+in+Git - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
fwiw, i suspect most of us that have voted simply prefer working with git over svn certainly anyone that has had to manage branching and merging with svn vs git would understand...it is simply better with git. sorry you had management push you to use Hg, but git is a solid upgrade over svn at this pointlook at the eclipse foundation, svn was trying to replace cvs there for years and with cvs being turned off everyone is going to git, and its but a nice upgrade. svn was never natively supported out of the gate with eclipse without extra installation steps...git is native in eclipse with the egit project. cvs is being turned off soon there and afaik no project chose to migrate to svn from cvs, they simply switched to git :) cheers, jesse -- jesse mcconnell jesse.mcconn...@gmail.com On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 8:05 AM, Chris Graham wrote: > It's not a matter of thinking that git is like SVN at all. > > It's the exact opposite in fact; they are different, to the extent that it > entails a whole new approach. > > We have a well resourced, well understood, well supported tool and mature > practices with our current SVN. > > All I am saying is that we really should stop and think as to whether we want > to throw that out. I, personally am not convinced. > > At the end of the day, it's more about WHAT we produce (maven, plugins etc) > than the TOOLS (SVN, git, etc) we use. > > For those who want to use git, fine stick with git SVN, but don't force me to > learn a new tool; I do enough of that already. (and I've just come from a > project where the personal preferences of a few immature devs forced the > abandonment of good mature practices and had Hg shoved down our throats; and > this is a $40 Billion dollar company, let's not make the same mistake here). > > -Chris > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 05/09/2012, at 9:41 PM, Arnaud Héritier wrote: > >> I think Olivier already replied to some points given few points where Git >> is really interesting : performances, branches management .. >> But yes there are skills to learn, it's not easy and the error is to think >> that Git is like SVN >> But it may be an opportunity to learn ? >> >> On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Chris Graham wrote: >> >>> -1 Non binding. >>> >>> I have no desire to setup and learn new tools for no clearly apparent >>> advantages. >>> There appears to be multitude of ways that DSCM's can be configured. I'm >>> not sure if sufficient thought/discussion has been given to the way in >>> which it should/can be set up. >>> Where it is to be hosted? >>> >>> My view: Move got a good reason. A fad is not a good reason. >>> >>> -Chris >>> >>> On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 9:25 PM, Stephen Connolly < >>> stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> +1. Have no spare time ATM, so cannot volunteer even if I would love to On 5 September 2012 12:04, Olivier Lamy wrote: > Hi, > This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one > svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). > First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra > for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if you > are volunteer you must say that with your vote). > The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the > minimum of 3 volunteers ! > BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! > The vote will decide on moving all the source tree (volunteers time > will the main throttle). > > Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on dev@ is > mandatory). > The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, indexer,core, > wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with > plugins immediately :-) ) > > Vote open for 72H. > > [+1] Move to git scm > [0] No interest > [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) > > > Thanks, > -- > Olivier Lamy > Talend: http://coders.talend.com > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> - >> Arnaud Héritier >> 06-89-76-64-24 >> http://aheritier.net >> Mail/GTalk: aherit...@gmail.com >> Twitter/Skype : aheritier > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
It's not a matter of thinking that git is like SVN at all. It's the exact opposite in fact; they are different, to the extent that it entails a whole new approach. We have a well resourced, well understood, well supported tool and mature practices with our current SVN. All I am saying is that we really should stop and think as to whether we want to throw that out. I, personally am not convinced. At the end of the day, it's more about WHAT we produce (maven, plugins etc) than the TOOLS (SVN, git, etc) we use. For those who want to use git, fine stick with git SVN, but don't force me to learn a new tool; I do enough of that already. (and I've just come from a project where the personal preferences of a few immature devs forced the abandonment of good mature practices and had Hg shoved down our throats; and this is a $40 Billion dollar company, let's not make the same mistake here). -Chris Sent from my iPhone On 05/09/2012, at 9:41 PM, Arnaud Héritier wrote: > I think Olivier already replied to some points given few points where Git > is really interesting : performances, branches management .. > But yes there are skills to learn, it's not easy and the error is to think > that Git is like SVN > But it may be an opportunity to learn ? > > On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Chris Graham wrote: > >> -1 Non binding. >> >> I have no desire to setup and learn new tools for no clearly apparent >> advantages. >> There appears to be multitude of ways that DSCM's can be configured. I'm >> not sure if sufficient thought/discussion has been given to the way in >> which it should/can be set up. >> Where it is to be hosted? >> >> My view: Move got a good reason. A fad is not a good reason. >> >> -Chris >> >> On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 9:25 PM, Stephen Connolly < >> stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> +1. Have no spare time ATM, so cannot volunteer even if I would love to >>> >>> On 5 September 2012 12:04, Olivier Lamy wrote: >>> Hi, This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if you are volunteer you must say that with your vote). The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the minimum of 3 volunteers ! BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! The vote will decide on moving all the source tree (volunteers time will the main throttle). Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on dev@ is mandatory). The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, indexer,core, wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with plugins immediately :-) ) Vote open for 72H. [+1] Move to git scm [0] No interest [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) Thanks, -- Olivier Lamy Talend: http://coders.talend.com http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >>> >> > > > > -- > - > Arnaud Héritier > 06-89-76-64-24 > http://aheritier.net > Mail/GTalk: aherit...@gmail.com > Twitter/Skype : aheritier - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
+1, cannot help unfortunatelely Milos On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 1:04 PM, Olivier Lamy wrote: > Hi, > This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one > svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). > First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra > for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if you > are volunteer you must say that with your vote). > The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the > minimum of 3 volunteers ! > BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! > The vote will decide on moving all the source tree (volunteers time > will the main throttle). > > Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on dev@ is mandatory). > The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, indexer,core, > wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with > plugins immediately :-) ) > > Vote open for 72H. > > [+1] Move to git scm > [0] No interest > [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) > > > Thanks, > -- > Olivier Lamy > Talend: http://coders.talend.com > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
+1 binding can help On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 7:45 AM, Jesse McConnell wrote: > +1, git is far beyond being a 'fad' > > > > -- > jesse mcconnell > jesse.mcconn...@gmail.com > > > On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 6:41 AM, Arnaud Héritier wrote: >> I think Olivier already replied to some points given few points where Git >> is really interesting : performances, branches management .. >> But yes there are skills to learn, it's not easy and the error is to think >> that Git is like SVN >> But it may be an opportunity to learn ? >> >> On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Chris Graham wrote: >> >>> -1 Non binding. >>> >>> I have no desire to setup and learn new tools for no clearly apparent >>> advantages. >>> There appears to be multitude of ways that DSCM's can be configured. I'm >>> not sure if sufficient thought/discussion has been given to the way in >>> which it should/can be set up. >>> Where it is to be hosted? >>> >>> My view: Move got a good reason. A fad is not a good reason. >>> >>> -Chris >>> >>> On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 9:25 PM, Stephen Connolly < >>> stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> > +1. Have no spare time ATM, so cannot volunteer even if I would love to >>> > >>> > On 5 September 2012 12:04, Olivier Lamy wrote: >>> > >>> > > Hi, >>> > > This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one >>> > > svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). >>> > > First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra >>> > > for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if you >>> > > are volunteer you must say that with your vote). >>> > > The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the >>> > > minimum of 3 volunteers ! >>> > > BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! >>> > > The vote will decide on moving all the source tree (volunteers time >>> > > will the main throttle). >>> > > >>> > > Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on dev@ is >>> > > mandatory). >>> > > The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, indexer,core, >>> > > wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with >>> > > plugins immediately :-) ) >>> > > >>> > > Vote open for 72H. >>> > > >>> > > [+1] Move to git scm >>> > > [0] No interest >>> > > [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > Thanks, >>> > > -- >>> > > Olivier Lamy >>> > > Talend: http://coders.talend.com >>> > > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy >>> > > >>> > > - >>> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >>> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >>> > > >>> > > >>> > >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> - >> Arnaud Héritier >> 06-89-76-64-24 >> http://aheritier.net >> Mail/GTalk: aherit...@gmail.com >> Twitter/Skype : aheritier > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
[VOTE] Maven SCM 1.8
Hi, I'd like to release Apache Maven Scm 1.8. We fixed 10 issues: http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10527&version=18444 Staging repository: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-037/ Staging site: http://maven.apache.org/scm-1.8/ Vote open for 72H [+1] [0] [-1] Thanks, -- Olivier Lamy Talend: http://coders.talend.com http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
I think Chris ask more what will that change for our projects for community point. Perso I'm a bit curious to see if that will increase externals contributions. I don't want to do that only to ease life of "private maven forkers". But so this discussion must in a separate thread not in the vote thread. 2012/9/5 Kristian Rosenvold : > The hosting bit is defined in context of apache, there is not much we > need to do in that respect. This dusussion has been on/off for quite a > few years, so I'm not entirely surprised if you haven't seen it all. > > As for "fad", I'm old enough to believe that version control systems > have their "epochs". No-one is using cvs anymore. This seems to be the > decade of git; I'm sure something new & shiney will pop up in a few > years time. > > > Kristian > > > 2012/9/5 Chris Graham : >> -1 Non binding. >> >> I have no desire to setup and learn new tools for no clearly apparent >> advantages. >> There appears to be multitude of ways that DSCM's can be configured. I'm >> not sure if sufficient thought/discussion has been given to the way in >> which it should/can be set up. >> Where it is to be hosted? >> >> My view: Move got a good reason. A fad is not a good reason. >> >> -Chris >> >> On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 9:25 PM, Stephen Connolly < >> stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> +1. Have no spare time ATM, so cannot volunteer even if I would love to >>> >>> On 5 September 2012 12:04, Olivier Lamy wrote: >>> >>> > Hi, >>> > This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one >>> > svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). >>> > First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra >>> > for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if you >>> > are volunteer you must say that with your vote). >>> > The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the >>> > minimum of 3 volunteers ! >>> > BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! >>> > The vote will decide on moving all the source tree (volunteers time >>> > will the main throttle). >>> > >>> > Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on dev@ is >>> > mandatory). >>> > The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, indexer,core, >>> > wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with >>> > plugins immediately :-) ) >>> > >>> > Vote open for 72H. >>> > >>> > [+1] Move to git scm >>> > [0] No interest >>> > [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) >>> > >>> > >>> > Thanks, >>> > -- >>> > Olivier Lamy >>> > Talend: http://coders.talend.com >>> > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy >>> > >>> > - >>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >>> > >>> > >>> > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > -- Olivier Lamy Talend: http://coders.talend.com http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
+1 (non-binding) -- Regards, Garvin LeClaire garvin.lecla...@gmail.com On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 8:33 AM, Anders Hammar wrote: > +1 (non-binding) > > But I don't have the hard-core git knowledge to help out in the move. > Would probably do more harm than good. :-) > > /Anders > On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 2:19 PM, Kristian Rosenvold > wrote: >> The hosting bit is defined in context of apache, there is not much we >> need to do in that respect. This dusussion has been on/off for quite a >> few years, so I'm not entirely surprised if you haven't seen it all. >> >> As for "fad", I'm old enough to believe that version control systems >> have their "epochs". No-one is using cvs anymore. This seems to be the >> decade of git; I'm sure something new & shiney will pop up in a few >> years time. >> >> >> Kristian >> >> >> 2012/9/5 Chris Graham : >>> -1 Non binding. >>> >>> I have no desire to setup and learn new tools for no clearly apparent >>> advantages. >>> There appears to be multitude of ways that DSCM's can be configured. I'm >>> not sure if sufficient thought/discussion has been given to the way in >>> which it should/can be set up. >>> Where it is to be hosted? >>> >>> My view: Move got a good reason. A fad is not a good reason. >>> >>> -Chris >>> >>> On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 9:25 PM, Stephen Connolly < >>> stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> +1. Have no spare time ATM, so cannot volunteer even if I would love to On 5 September 2012 12:04, Olivier Lamy wrote: > Hi, > This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one > svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). > First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra > for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if you > are volunteer you must say that with your vote). > The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the > minimum of 3 volunteers ! > BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! > The vote will decide on moving all the source tree (volunteers time > will the main throttle). > > Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on dev@ is > mandatory). > The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, indexer,core, > wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with > plugins immediately :-) ) > > Vote open for 72H. > > [+1] Move to git scm > [0] No interest > [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) > > > Thanks, > -- > Olivier Lamy > Talend: http://coders.talend.com > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >> > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
+1 (non-binding) But I don't have the hard-core git knowledge to help out in the move. Would probably do more harm than good. :-) /Anders On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 2:19 PM, Kristian Rosenvold wrote: > The hosting bit is defined in context of apache, there is not much we > need to do in that respect. This dusussion has been on/off for quite a > few years, so I'm not entirely surprised if you haven't seen it all. > > As for "fad", I'm old enough to believe that version control systems > have their "epochs". No-one is using cvs anymore. This seems to be the > decade of git; I'm sure something new & shiney will pop up in a few > years time. > > > Kristian > > > 2012/9/5 Chris Graham : >> -1 Non binding. >> >> I have no desire to setup and learn new tools for no clearly apparent >> advantages. >> There appears to be multitude of ways that DSCM's can be configured. I'm >> not sure if sufficient thought/discussion has been given to the way in >> which it should/can be set up. >> Where it is to be hosted? >> >> My view: Move got a good reason. A fad is not a good reason. >> >> -Chris >> >> On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 9:25 PM, Stephen Connolly < >> stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> +1. Have no spare time ATM, so cannot volunteer even if I would love to >>> >>> On 5 September 2012 12:04, Olivier Lamy wrote: >>> >>> > Hi, >>> > This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one >>> > svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). >>> > First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra >>> > for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if you >>> > are volunteer you must say that with your vote). >>> > The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the >>> > minimum of 3 volunteers ! >>> > BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! >>> > The vote will decide on moving all the source tree (volunteers time >>> > will the main throttle). >>> > >>> > Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on dev@ is >>> > mandatory). >>> > The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, indexer,core, >>> > wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with >>> > plugins immediately :-) ) >>> > >>> > Vote open for 72H. >>> > >>> > [+1] Move to git scm >>> > [0] No interest >>> > [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) >>> > >>> > >>> > Thanks, >>> > -- >>> > Olivier Lamy >>> > Talend: http://coders.talend.com >>> > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy >>> > >>> > - >>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >>> > >>> > >>> > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Git as the canonical SCM
While I'm sure it's academically interesting, I'm not sure if this discussion is all that relevant for practical purposes. We adapt/optimize for the technologies we use, and in moving to git I'm quite convinced anything other than 1 release unit = 1 repo is suboptimal. All the chit-chat about sparse checkouts is basically how to live with suboptimal repos, and there is really no good reason why we should choose to do that. As for your considerations on mixed merge/rebase workflows, you're describing some hard cases that are quite far from beginners workflow that require decent understanding of how things work. I work daily with multiple remotes (apache/github) merges and rebases and I hardly even think about it. But then again I'm probably a black belt user. I'm not going to scare off beginners about the wonders of rebasing merge commits because it is a problem they shouldnt be running into. Kristian 2012/9/5 Mark Struberg : >> No longer true, git has sparse checkout support (I believe since 1.7.0). > > I hear this argument over and over again, and it is still wrong! > > > The sparse checkout support is only fragmentaric at least! It's for sure not > comparable with the sparse checkout features of SVN. I'd rather call it > 'farce checkout' :) > > Try creating a sparse branch > Try creating a sparse tag > Try getting multiple sparse checkouts at the same time > > > git is good, but it it's basic design decisions does not fit to all project > setups. > E.g. GIT is still primarily intended for only pushing to your own repo. Try > to do a git merge and later rebase of a concurring merge conflict. You will > end up with all commits duplicated in the history... > > LieGrue, > strub > > > > - Original Message - >> From: Stanislav Ochotnicky >> To: Maven Developers List >> Cc: >> Sent: Wednesday, September 5, 2012 9:51 AM >> Subject: Re: Git as the canonical SCM >> >> Quoting Olivier Lamy (2012-09-04 22:23:11) >> ... >>> Due to lack of support of sparse checkout in git, I (perso) don't want >>> we have to create a git repo per plugin etc... >>> IMHO That will be a pain to manage. >> >> No longer true, git has sparse checkout support (I believe since 1.7.0). >> See http://git-scm.com/docs/git-read-tree.html (search for Sparse >> checkout section). There are multiple examples spread through the >> interwebs, one would be: >> http://jasonkarns.com/blog/subdirectory-checkouts-with-git-sparse-checkout/ >> >> And there's always shallow clones which are fine for sending >> format-patch(es). >> >> That said, the code should IMHO be split into repositories depending on >> their releases (i.e. code that gets releases simultaneously should be in >> one repo, code that has multiple parts which get their own release tags >> should be in separate repos) >> >> -- >> Stanislav Ochotnicky >> Software Engineer - Base Operating Systems Brno >> >> PGP: 7B087241 >> Red Hat Inc. http://cz.redhat.com >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >> > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
The hosting bit is defined in context of apache, there is not much we need to do in that respect. This dusussion has been on/off for quite a few years, so I'm not entirely surprised if you haven't seen it all. As for "fad", I'm old enough to believe that version control systems have their "epochs". No-one is using cvs anymore. This seems to be the decade of git; I'm sure something new & shiney will pop up in a few years time. Kristian 2012/9/5 Chris Graham : > -1 Non binding. > > I have no desire to setup and learn new tools for no clearly apparent > advantages. > There appears to be multitude of ways that DSCM's can be configured. I'm > not sure if sufficient thought/discussion has been given to the way in > which it should/can be set up. > Where it is to be hosted? > > My view: Move got a good reason. A fad is not a good reason. > > -Chris > > On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 9:25 PM, Stephen Connolly < > stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> +1. Have no spare time ATM, so cannot volunteer even if I would love to >> >> On 5 September 2012 12:04, Olivier Lamy wrote: >> >> > Hi, >> > This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one >> > svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). >> > First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra >> > for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if you >> > are volunteer you must say that with your vote). >> > The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the >> > minimum of 3 volunteers ! >> > BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! >> > The vote will decide on moving all the source tree (volunteers time >> > will the main throttle). >> > >> > Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on dev@ is >> > mandatory). >> > The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, indexer,core, >> > wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with >> > plugins immediately :-) ) >> > >> > Vote open for 72H. >> > >> > [+1] Move to git scm >> > [0] No interest >> > [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) >> > >> > >> > Thanks, >> > -- >> > Olivier Lamy >> > Talend: http://coders.talend.com >> > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy >> > >> > - >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >> > >> > >> - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
+1, git is far beyond being a 'fad' -- jesse mcconnell jesse.mcconn...@gmail.com On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 6:41 AM, Arnaud Héritier wrote: > I think Olivier already replied to some points given few points where Git > is really interesting : performances, branches management .. > But yes there are skills to learn, it's not easy and the error is to think > that Git is like SVN > But it may be an opportunity to learn ? > > On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Chris Graham wrote: > >> -1 Non binding. >> >> I have no desire to setup and learn new tools for no clearly apparent >> advantages. >> There appears to be multitude of ways that DSCM's can be configured. I'm >> not sure if sufficient thought/discussion has been given to the way in >> which it should/can be set up. >> Where it is to be hosted? >> >> My view: Move got a good reason. A fad is not a good reason. >> >> -Chris >> >> On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 9:25 PM, Stephen Connolly < >> stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > +1. Have no spare time ATM, so cannot volunteer even if I would love to >> > >> > On 5 September 2012 12:04, Olivier Lamy wrote: >> > >> > > Hi, >> > > This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one >> > > svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). >> > > First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra >> > > for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if you >> > > are volunteer you must say that with your vote). >> > > The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the >> > > minimum of 3 volunteers ! >> > > BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! >> > > The vote will decide on moving all the source tree (volunteers time >> > > will the main throttle). >> > > >> > > Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on dev@ is >> > > mandatory). >> > > The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, indexer,core, >> > > wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with >> > > plugins immediately :-) ) >> > > >> > > Vote open for 72H. >> > > >> > > [+1] Move to git scm >> > > [0] No interest >> > > [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) >> > > >> > > >> > > Thanks, >> > > -- >> > > Olivier Lamy >> > > Talend: http://coders.talend.com >> > > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy >> > > >> > > - >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >> > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > -- > - > Arnaud Héritier > 06-89-76-64-24 > http://aheritier.net > Mail/GTalk: aherit...@gmail.com > Twitter/Skype : aheritier - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
I think Olivier already replied to some points given few points where Git is really interesting : performances, branches management .. But yes there are skills to learn, it's not easy and the error is to think that Git is like SVN But it may be an opportunity to learn ? On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Chris Graham wrote: > -1 Non binding. > > I have no desire to setup and learn new tools for no clearly apparent > advantages. > There appears to be multitude of ways that DSCM's can be configured. I'm > not sure if sufficient thought/discussion has been given to the way in > which it should/can be set up. > Where it is to be hosted? > > My view: Move got a good reason. A fad is not a good reason. > > -Chris > > On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 9:25 PM, Stephen Connolly < > stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > +1. Have no spare time ATM, so cannot volunteer even if I would love to > > > > On 5 September 2012 12:04, Olivier Lamy wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one > > > svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). > > > First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra > > > for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if you > > > are volunteer you must say that with your vote). > > > The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the > > > minimum of 3 volunteers ! > > > BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! > > > The vote will decide on moving all the source tree (volunteers time > > > will the main throttle). > > > > > > Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on dev@ is > > > mandatory). > > > The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, indexer,core, > > > wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with > > > plugins immediately :-) ) > > > > > > Vote open for 72H. > > > > > > [+1] Move to git scm > > > [0] No interest > > > [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > -- > > > Olivier Lamy > > > Talend: http://coders.talend.com > > > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy > > > > > > - > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > > > > > > -- - Arnaud Héritier 06-89-76-64-24 http://aheritier.net Mail/GTalk: aherit...@gmail.com Twitter/Skype : aheritier
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
+1 Il giorno 05/set/2012 13:04, "Olivier Lamy" ha scritto: > Hi, > This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one > svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). > First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra > for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if you > are volunteer you must say that with your vote). > The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the > minimum of 3 volunteers ! > BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! > The vote will decide on moving all the source tree (volunteers time > will the main throttle). > > Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on dev@ is > mandatory). > The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, indexer,core, > wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with > plugins immediately :-) ) > > Vote open for 72H. > > [+1] Move to git scm > [0] No interest > [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) > > > Thanks, > -- > Olivier Lamy > Talend: http://coders.talend.com > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
-1 Non binding. I have no desire to setup and learn new tools for no clearly apparent advantages. There appears to be multitude of ways that DSCM's can be configured. I'm not sure if sufficient thought/discussion has been given to the way in which it should/can be set up. Where it is to be hosted? My view: Move got a good reason. A fad is not a good reason. -Chris On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 9:25 PM, Stephen Connolly < stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1. Have no spare time ATM, so cannot volunteer even if I would love to > > On 5 September 2012 12:04, Olivier Lamy wrote: > > > Hi, > > This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one > > svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). > > First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra > > for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if you > > are volunteer you must say that with your vote). > > The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the > > minimum of 3 volunteers ! > > BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! > > The vote will decide on moving all the source tree (volunteers time > > will the main throttle). > > > > Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on dev@ is > > mandatory). > > The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, indexer,core, > > wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with > > plugins immediately :-) ) > > > > Vote open for 72H. > > > > [+1] Move to git scm > > [0] No interest > > [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) > > > > > > Thanks, > > -- > > Olivier Lamy > > Talend: http://coders.talend.com > > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > >
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
On Wed, 5 Sep 2012 13:04:29 +0200 Olivier Lamy wrote: +1, but can not be volunteer no time at all ATM. Next month should be better to help you guys and do some code at last... tony. > Hi, > This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one > svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). > First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra > for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if you > are volunteer you must say that with your vote). > The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the > minimum of 3 volunteers ! > BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! > The vote will decide on moving all the source tree (volunteers time > will the main throttle). > > Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on dev@ is mandatory). > The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, indexer,core, > wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with > plugins immediately :-) ) > > Vote open for 72H. > > [+1] Move to git scm > [0] No interest > [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) > > > Thanks, -- Tony Chemit tél: +33 (0) 2 40 50 29 28 email: che...@codelutin.com http://www.codelutin.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
+1 and volunteer for infra help. I'll find the opportunity to launch few more shells commands per day :-) Arnaud On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 1:25 PM, Stephen Connolly < stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1. Have no spare time ATM, so cannot volunteer even if I would love to > > On 5 September 2012 12:04, Olivier Lamy wrote: > > > Hi, > > This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one > > svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). > > First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra > > for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if you > > are volunteer you must say that with your vote). > > The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the > > minimum of 3 volunteers ! > > BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! > > The vote will decide on moving all the source tree (volunteers time > > will the main throttle). > > > > Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on dev@ is > > mandatory). > > The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, indexer,core, > > wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with > > plugins immediately :-) ) > > > > Vote open for 72H. > > > > [+1] Move to git scm > > [0] No interest > > [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) > > > > > > Thanks, > > -- > > Olivier Lamy > > Talend: http://coders.talend.com > > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > > -- - Arnaud Héritier 06-89-76-64-24 http://aheritier.net Mail/GTalk: aherit...@gmail.com Twitter/Skype : aheritier
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
+1. Have no spare time ATM, so cannot volunteer even if I would love to On 5 September 2012 12:04, Olivier Lamy wrote: > Hi, > This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one > svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). > First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra > for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if you > are volunteer you must say that with your vote). > The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the > minimum of 3 volunteers ! > BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! > The vote will decide on moving all the source tree (volunteers time > will the main throttle). > > Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on dev@ is > mandatory). > The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, indexer,core, > wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with > plugins immediately :-) ) > > Vote open for 72H. > > [+1] Move to git scm > [0] No interest > [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) > > > Thanks, > -- > Olivier Lamy > Talend: http://coders.talend.com > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
+1 Will volunteer Den 5. sep. 2012 kl. 13:04 skrev Olivier Lamy : > Hi, > This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one > svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). > First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra > for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if you > are volunteer you must say that with your vote). > The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the > minimum of 3 volunteers ! > BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! > The vote will decide on moving all the source tree (volunteers time > will the main throttle). > > Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on dev@ is mandatory). > The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, indexer,core, > wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with > plugins immediately :-) ) > > Vote open for 72H. > > [+1] Move to git scm > [0] No interest > [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) > > > Thanks, > -- > Olivier Lamy > Talend: http://coders.talend.com > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
+1 and volunteer for infra help. 2012/9/5 Olivier Lamy : > Hi, > This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one > svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). > First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra > for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if you > are volunteer you must say that with your vote). > The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the > minimum of 3 volunteers ! > BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! > The vote will decide on moving all the source tree (volunteers time > will the main throttle). > > Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on dev@ is mandatory). > The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, indexer,core, > wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with > plugins immediately :-) ) > > Vote open for 72H. > > [+1] Move to git scm > [0] No interest > [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) > > > Thanks, > -- > Olivier Lamy > Talend: http://coders.talend.com > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy -- Olivier Lamy Talend: http://coders.talend.com http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
[VOTE] Move Maven projects sources to git
Hi, This vote is to decide moving our source tree currently located in one svn repository to git (multiple git repositories). First, we need to have at least 3 volunteers to help on Apache infra for this move and more generally on git Apache infrastructure. (if you are volunteer you must say that with your vote). The vote will pass on majority (PMC committer) and if we have the minimum of 3 volunteers ! BTW contributors can express their opinion by a vote too ! The vote will decide on moving all the source tree (volunteers time will the main throttle). Volunteers will decide on what they move (notification on dev@ is mandatory). The goal is to move simple projects first(scm,surefire, indexer,core, wagon etc..) then plugins (except if Kristian want to start with plugins immediately :-) ) Vote open for 72H. [+1] Move to git scm [0] No interest [-1] don't move to git (please explain why) Thanks, -- Olivier Lamy Talend: http://coders.talend.com http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Git as the canonical SCM
> No longer true, git has sparse checkout support (I believe since 1.7.0). I hear this argument over and over again, and it is still wrong! The sparse checkout support is only fragmentaric at least! It's for sure not comparable with the sparse checkout features of SVN. I'd rather call it 'farce checkout' :) Try creating a sparse branch Try creating a sparse tag Try getting multiple sparse checkouts at the same time git is good, but it it's basic design decisions does not fit to all project setups. E.g. GIT is still primarily intended for only pushing to your own repo. Try to do a git merge and later rebase of a concurring merge conflict. You will end up with all commits duplicated in the history... LieGrue, strub - Original Message - > From: Stanislav Ochotnicky > To: Maven Developers List > Cc: > Sent: Wednesday, September 5, 2012 9:51 AM > Subject: Re: Git as the canonical SCM > > Quoting Olivier Lamy (2012-09-04 22:23:11) > ... >> Due to lack of support of sparse checkout in git, I (perso) don't want >> we have to create a git repo per plugin etc... >> IMHO That will be a pain to manage. > > No longer true, git has sparse checkout support (I believe since 1.7.0). > See http://git-scm.com/docs/git-read-tree.html (search for Sparse > checkout section). There are multiple examples spread through the > interwebs, one would be: > http://jasonkarns.com/blog/subdirectory-checkouts-with-git-sparse-checkout/ > > And there's always shallow clones which are fine for sending > format-patch(es). > > That said, the code should IMHO be split into repositories depending on > their releases (i.e. code that gets releases simultaneously should be in > one repo, code that has multiple parts which get their own release tags > should be in separate repos) > > -- > Stanislav Ochotnicky > Software Engineer - Base Operating Systems Brno > > PGP: 7B087241 > Red Hat Inc. http://cz.redhat.com > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Git as the canonical SCM
Now apply this to maven-scm if you like to have a test object. This sometimes gets built in one go, sometimes as single modules, ... LieGrue, strub - Original Message - > From: Kristian Rosenvold > To: Maven Developers List > Cc: > Sent: Wednesday, September 5, 2012 9:31 AM > Subject: Re: Git as the canonical SCM > > I think we should move to git; probably starting with a few > repositories. I will not go into the argument as to why (it's been > covered like a zillion times, link by Andrew covers a lot of it), > other than to mention that the immense ease of moving around in > history means that I never have to consider a patch "stale" since I > can easily review it at the point in history it was created; > additionally there's a much-improved chance I can move this to the top > of history without being stale) > > Basically I've been meaning to start av vote suggesting that we: > > 1) Decide to move *all* maven projects to git, time frame subject to > project/asf/infra capacity. We're in no immense hurry. > 2) Kick off the effort by moving 2-3 projects initially, 1-2 easy ones > (just to get the general feel for how things work) and a hard one. > Right now I'd suggest something like m3-core, surefire( or scm) and > maven-plugins, the last being the hard one ;) > > I herby volunteer to do the donkey-work, including some massive > filter-branch operations on the current asf maven-plugins git clone. > > I think we should split maven-plugins, because I think the solution > chosen is optimized for the wrong uses cases, and it only helps for > setting up CI jobs. The rest of the community basically has no value > in the current set-up. > > Which makes me think we should consider such a switch an opportunity > to re-think some of our tooling > around multi-module projects. What the 99% others want (who're not > setting up a CI) is a checkout algorithm that builds the *vertical* > stack for a given plugin, not the horizontal top-level stack for all > the plugins (which is what we have currently). So if I checkout > "maven-ear-plugin", I would basically want something like this: > root-dir\ > maven-ear-plugin\ > maven-archiver\ > maven-filtering\ > plexus-archiver\ > plexus-utils > .. maybe more.. (probably configurable somewhere) > > Now if the checkout would generate a synethetic parent pom with all > these as modules, I could just load it all up in IDEA and be ready to > go. I think something like this would have /real/ value to most of our > users, whereas the current maven-plugins layout really only is > valuable for whoever is configuring a CI to build maven-plugins. > > No matter what, I think there's very lfew practical use cases for > having all the modules chunked together. > > Kristian > > > 2012/9/4 Olivier Lamy : >> 2012/9/4 Andrew Waterman : >>> The drools guys did a really nice move from Subversion a few years > back. >>> >>> http://blog.athico.com/2010/12/drools-migrated-to-git.html >>> >>> One of the key things they did, was reorganize their poms and project > structure. >>> >>> I'd be willing to help out. I think there could be a lot more to > this move than just importing from subversion, but it depends on what you > guys > want to do. >> >> Yup I agree. >> I use git on other oss projects (Apache: cloudstack and non Apache: >> jenkins ...) and git svn for some asf projects. >> Due to lack of support of sparse checkout in git, I (perso) don't want >> we have to create a git repo per plugin etc... >> IMHO That will be a pain to manage. >> >>> >>> best wishes, >>> >>> Andrew >>> >>> On Sep 4, 2012, at 3:09 PM, "Jason Pyeron" > wrote: >>> > -Original Message- > From: Jason van Zyl > Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2012 15:55 > > How's Git doing at Apache these days? > > Anyone interested in pursuing putting Maven in Git as the > canonical SCM? Comments from the peanut gallery: It would make it very nice to > contribute back. Since I do not have a sandbox access I have thrown away fixes > because there was no efficient way to track them until they were accepted as patches. > (same problem in struts, commons, ...) We would be very happy here at PD Inc if that was done. -Jason Pyeron -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- - - - Jason Pyeron PD Inc. http://www.pdinc.us - - Principal Consultant 10 West 24th Street #100 - - +1 (443) 269-1555 x333 Baltimore, Maryland 21218 - - - -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- This message is copyright PD Inc, subject to license 20080407P00. > ---
Re: Git as the canonical SCM
+1000 and don't forget one of the simplest: maven-indexer (my guts always tremble when I need to dcommit there, due to stupid eu/us git-svn problems) :D Thanks, ~t~ On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Arnaud Héritier wrote: > +1 to do it step by step > The conversion is "easy" for projects having already a dedicated > trunk/tags/branches entry in SVN > It will be less funny for plugins but possible. > I'm also in favor to split per project/lifecycle even if it is creating a > lot of repositories > The problem to loose the plugins reactor is for me a problem only for CI > and it may be the opportunity for us to think to add the feature of modules > described per GAV and automatically checked out from the SCM :-) > For the ability for a developer to clone all repo (an operation we are > doing only once) we may have a shell script or something like that if we > don't have something better from infra side. (or we clone their copies from > github and its easy with few lines of ruby or something like that) > > Cheers, > > On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 9:31 AM, Kristian Rosenvold < > kristian.rosenv...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I think we should move to git; probably starting with a few > > repositories. I will not go into the argument as to why (it's been > > covered like a zillion times, link by Andrew covers a lot of it), > > other than to mention that the immense ease of moving around in > > history means that I never have to consider a patch "stale" since I > > can easily review it at the point in history it was created; > > additionally there's a much-improved chance I can move this to the top > > of history without being stale) > > > > Basically I've been meaning to start av vote suggesting that we: > > > > 1) Decide to move *all* maven projects to git, time frame subject to > > project/asf/infra capacity. We're in no immense hurry. > > 2) Kick off the effort by moving 2-3 projects initially, 1-2 easy ones > > (just to get the general feel for how things work) and a hard one. > > Right now I'd suggest something like m3-core, surefire( or scm) and > > maven-plugins, the last being the hard one ;) > > > > I herby volunteer to do the donkey-work, including some massive > > filter-branch operations on the current asf maven-plugins git clone. > > > > I think we should split maven-plugins, because I think the solution > > chosen is optimized for the wrong uses cases, and it only helps for > > setting up CI jobs. The rest of the community basically has no value > > in the current set-up. > > > > Which makes me think we should consider such a switch an opportunity > > to re-think some of our tooling > > around multi-module projects. What the 99% others want (who're not > > setting up a CI) is a checkout algorithm that builds the *vertical* > > stack for a given plugin, not the horizontal top-level stack for all > > the plugins (which is what we have currently). So if I checkout > > "maven-ear-plugin", I would basically want something like this: > > root-dir\ > > maven-ear-plugin\ > > maven-archiver\ > > maven-filtering\ > > plexus-archiver\ > > plexus-utils > > .. maybe more.. (probably configurable somewhere) > > > > Now if the checkout would generate a synethetic parent pom with all > > these as modules, I could just load it all up in IDEA and be ready to > > go. I think something like this would have /real/ value to most of our > > users, whereas the current maven-plugins layout really only is > > valuable for whoever is configuring a CI to build maven-plugins. > > > > No matter what, I think there's very lfew practical use cases for > > having all the modules chunked together. > > > > Kristian > > > > > > 2012/9/4 Olivier Lamy : > > > 2012/9/4 Andrew Waterman : > > >> The drools guys did a really nice move from Subversion a few years > back. > > >> > > >> http://blog.athico.com/2010/12/drools-migrated-to-git.html > > >> > > >> One of the key things they did, was reorganize their poms and project > > structure. > > >> > > >> I'd be willing to help out. I think there could be a lot more to this > > move than just importing from subversion, but it depends on what you guys > > want to do. > > > > > > Yup I agree. > > > I use git on other oss projects (Apache: cloudstack and non Apache: > > > jenkins ...) and git svn for some asf projects. > > > Due to lack of support of sparse checkout in git, I (perso) don't want > > > we have to create a git repo per plugin etc... > > > IMHO That will be a pain to manage. > > > > > >> > > >> best wishes, > > >> > > >> Andrew > > >> > > >> On Sep 4, 2012, at 3:09 PM, "Jason Pyeron" wrote: > > >> > > -Original Message- > > From: Jason van Zyl > > Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2012 15:55 > > > > How's Git doing at Apache these days? > > > > Anyone interested in pursuing putting Maven in Git as the > > canonical SCM? > > >>> > > >>> Comments from the peanut gallery: It would make it very nice to > > contribute back. > > >>> Since I do no
Re: Git as the canonical SCM
+1 to do it step by step The conversion is "easy" for projects having already a dedicated trunk/tags/branches entry in SVN It will be less funny for plugins but possible. I'm also in favor to split per project/lifecycle even if it is creating a lot of repositories The problem to loose the plugins reactor is for me a problem only for CI and it may be the opportunity for us to think to add the feature of modules described per GAV and automatically checked out from the SCM :-) For the ability for a developer to clone all repo (an operation we are doing only once) we may have a shell script or something like that if we don't have something better from infra side. (or we clone their copies from github and its easy with few lines of ruby or something like that) Cheers, On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 9:31 AM, Kristian Rosenvold < kristian.rosenv...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think we should move to git; probably starting with a few > repositories. I will not go into the argument as to why (it's been > covered like a zillion times, link by Andrew covers a lot of it), > other than to mention that the immense ease of moving around in > history means that I never have to consider a patch "stale" since I > can easily review it at the point in history it was created; > additionally there's a much-improved chance I can move this to the top > of history without being stale) > > Basically I've been meaning to start av vote suggesting that we: > > 1) Decide to move *all* maven projects to git, time frame subject to > project/asf/infra capacity. We're in no immense hurry. > 2) Kick off the effort by moving 2-3 projects initially, 1-2 easy ones > (just to get the general feel for how things work) and a hard one. > Right now I'd suggest something like m3-core, surefire( or scm) and > maven-plugins, the last being the hard one ;) > > I herby volunteer to do the donkey-work, including some massive > filter-branch operations on the current asf maven-plugins git clone. > > I think we should split maven-plugins, because I think the solution > chosen is optimized for the wrong uses cases, and it only helps for > setting up CI jobs. The rest of the community basically has no value > in the current set-up. > > Which makes me think we should consider such a switch an opportunity > to re-think some of our tooling > around multi-module projects. What the 99% others want (who're not > setting up a CI) is a checkout algorithm that builds the *vertical* > stack for a given plugin, not the horizontal top-level stack for all > the plugins (which is what we have currently). So if I checkout > "maven-ear-plugin", I would basically want something like this: > root-dir\ > maven-ear-plugin\ > maven-archiver\ > maven-filtering\ > plexus-archiver\ > plexus-utils > .. maybe more.. (probably configurable somewhere) > > Now if the checkout would generate a synethetic parent pom with all > these as modules, I could just load it all up in IDEA and be ready to > go. I think something like this would have /real/ value to most of our > users, whereas the current maven-plugins layout really only is > valuable for whoever is configuring a CI to build maven-plugins. > > No matter what, I think there's very lfew practical use cases for > having all the modules chunked together. > > Kristian > > > 2012/9/4 Olivier Lamy : > > 2012/9/4 Andrew Waterman : > >> The drools guys did a really nice move from Subversion a few years back. > >> > >> http://blog.athico.com/2010/12/drools-migrated-to-git.html > >> > >> One of the key things they did, was reorganize their poms and project > structure. > >> > >> I'd be willing to help out. I think there could be a lot more to this > move than just importing from subversion, but it depends on what you guys > want to do. > > > > Yup I agree. > > I use git on other oss projects (Apache: cloudstack and non Apache: > > jenkins ...) and git svn for some asf projects. > > Due to lack of support of sparse checkout in git, I (perso) don't want > > we have to create a git repo per plugin etc... > > IMHO That will be a pain to manage. > > > >> > >> best wishes, > >> > >> Andrew > >> > >> On Sep 4, 2012, at 3:09 PM, "Jason Pyeron" wrote: > >> > -Original Message- > From: Jason van Zyl > Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2012 15:55 > > How's Git doing at Apache these days? > > Anyone interested in pursuing putting Maven in Git as the > canonical SCM? > >>> > >>> Comments from the peanut gallery: It would make it very nice to > contribute back. > >>> Since I do not have a sandbox access I have thrown away fixes because > there was > >>> no efficient way to track them until they were accepted as patches. > (same > >>> problem in struts, commons, ...) > >>> > >>> We would be very happy here at PD Inc if that was done. > >>> > >>> -Jason Pyeron > >>> > >>> -- > >>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > >>> - - > >>> -
Re: Git as the canonical SCM
2012/9/5 Kristian Rosenvold : > I think we should move to git; probably starting with a few > repositories. I will not go into the argument as to why (it's been > covered like a zillion times, link by Andrew covers a lot of it), Yes we must avoid such buzz/troll to save our 'reading importants emails' time :-) as we are sure git is a nice scm. And this topic has been already enough discussed here it's time to move forward on that ! I personally use only git (git svn for Apache). And for sure using native git will save some of my cpu cycles and network bandwidth :-) (git push or git fetch / rebase will be certainly better than git svn dcommit or git svn rebase). > other than to mention that the immense ease of moving around in > history means that I never have to consider a patch "stale" since I > can easily review it at the point in history it was created; > additionally there's a much-improved chance I can move this to the top > of history without being stale) > > Basically I've been meaning to start av vote suggesting that we: > > 1) Decide to move *all* maven projects to git, time frame subject to > project/asf/infra capacity. We're in no immense hurry. > 2) Kick off the effort by moving 2-3 projects initially, 1-2 easy ones > (just to get the general feel for how things work) and a hard one. > Right now I'd suggest something like m3-core, surefire( or scm) and > maven-plugins, the last being the hard one ;) ASF infra ask volunteers from TLP projects which want to use git to help on infra tasks related to git admin. Perso I can but as I won't have enough cycles I'd like to see an other volunteer. Kristian ? IMHO we must start with maven-3 to improve participation from others as it looks to be the goal and that will do more marketing/buzz than moving scm or wagon :-). I can start the vote (maybe a vote with a majority of +1 from committers) > > I herby volunteer to do the donkey-work, including some massive > filter-branch operations on the current asf maven-plugins git clone. Cool ! > > I think we should split maven-plugins, because I think the solution > chosen is optimized for the wrong uses cases, and it only helps for > setting up CI jobs. The rest of the community basically has no value > in the current set-up. Yup but that's more easy to maintain than a ton of jenkins jobs > > Which makes me think we should consider such a switch an opportunity > to re-think some of our tooling > around multi-module projects. What the 99% others want (who're not > setting up a CI) is a checkout algorithm that builds the *vertical* > stack for a given plugin, not the horizontal top-level stack for all > the plugins (which is what we have currently). So if I checkout > "maven-ear-plugin", I would basically want something like this: > root-dir\ > maven-ear-plugin\ > maven-archiver\ > maven-filtering\ > plexus-archiver\ > plexus-utils > .. maybe more.. (probably configurable somewhere) > > Now if the checkout would generate a synethetic parent pom with all > these as modules, I could just load it all up in IDEA and be ready to > go. I think something like this would have /real/ value to most of our > users, whereas the current maven-plugins layout really only is > valuable for whoever is configuring a CI to build maven-plugins. That's a good idea !! What about a maven plugin for that ? :-) checkout/clone your project then mvn sources:checkout-dependencies (or clone-dependencies :-) ). The plugin could have a look at dependencies scm section and if exists checkout/clone the sources locally (we have all the necessary components for that) > > No matter what, I think there's very lfew practical use cases for > having all the modules chunked together. > > Kristian > > > 2012/9/4 Olivier Lamy : >> 2012/9/4 Andrew Waterman : >>> The drools guys did a really nice move from Subversion a few years back. >>> >>> http://blog.athico.com/2010/12/drools-migrated-to-git.html >>> >>> One of the key things they did, was reorganize their poms and project >>> structure. >>> >>> I'd be willing to help out. I think there could be a lot more to this move >>> than just importing from subversion, but it depends on what you guys want >>> to do. >> >> Yup I agree. >> I use git on other oss projects (Apache: cloudstack and non Apache: >> jenkins ...) and git svn for some asf projects. >> Due to lack of support of sparse checkout in git, I (perso) don't want >> we have to create a git repo per plugin etc... >> IMHO That will be a pain to manage. >> >>> >>> best wishes, >>> >>> Andrew >>> >>> On Sep 4, 2012, at 3:09 PM, "Jason Pyeron" wrote: >>> > -Original Message- > From: Jason van Zyl > Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2012 15:55 > > How's Git doing at Apache these days? > > Anyone interested in pursuing putting Maven in Git as the > canonical SCM? Comments from the peanut gallery: It would make it very nice to contribute back. Since I do not have a sandbox access I have thrown a
Re: Moving our distrib to svnpub
2012/9/5 Anders Hammar : >>> This would be for the RCs as well? >> Sure I will update the procedure as well. > > Ok, I'm not sure I see the point. The RCs will never be released and > the whole point of this storage is for released stuff, right? The only > point would be to keep things in dev/ as an archive. Not sure there's > much value in that though. As long as you commit stuff to https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev it will be never sync to Apache download sites. My idea is we have a process so use it even if it's RCs or final. (IMHO more simple than if RC then blabla else blabla) > >> But during vote time the candidate will be there: >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/maven/maven3/3.0.5 >> when the vote passed >> svn mv https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/maven/maven-3/3.0.5 >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/maven/maven--3/ > > OK, it is moved (not copied). > > My suggestion is this: > Only check in candidates of things that could eventually be released > (thus, not Maven Core RCs). Once released, we do a move from dev/ to > release/. For dropped candidates, we delete them from dev/. Yup good. I will wait a bit reactions/flames and finish the stuff (update website with new download urls, update procedure pages) > > /Anders > >> >>> Then once the vote has passed releasing is simple copy from https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ to https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release (et voilà) >>> >>> Would we leave the released files in dev/ when copying, or should they >>> be removed? And if we commit the RCs, should they be kept in dev/ or >>> removed once we roll the real release? >>> >>> I guess I'm kind of wondering if dev/ should be some kind of archive. >> That's just a sample of the tree :-) >> I will move the dev content to release. >>> If it supposed to be an archive (which includes the RCs), then maybe >>> even re-rolled candidates should be kept as well? But that could be >>> very confusing... >>> >>> /Anders >>> For that we could use a per version model: http://www.eu.apache.org/dist/maven/maven-3/3.0.4 http://www.eu.apache.org/dist/maven/maven-2/2.2.1 http://www.eu.apache.org/dist/maven/ant-tasks/ WDYT ? Note: I have created the issue https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-5224 if you want to follow up. 2012/8/22 Hervé BOUTEMY : > IIUC, it's https, not http :) > > no objection here, just documentation to update [1] > > Regards, > > Hervé > > [1] http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/maven-core-release.html > > Le mercredi 22 août 2012 00:36:53 Olivier Lamy a écrit : >> Hi, >> Before the end of the year, all Apache projects must move their >> distrib to svnpub (instead of using scp to people.a.o) >> >> It's as simple as having content from >> http://www.us.apache.org/dist/maven/ available in >> http://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/maven/ >> This is for core distrib (maven 1,2.0,2.2.1,3 and ant task). >> >> No objections I do the stuff early next week ? > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > -- Olivier Lamy Talend: http://coders.talend.com http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >>> >>> - >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Olivier Lamy >> Talend: http://coders.talend.com >> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >> > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > -- Olivier Lamy Talend: http://coders.talend.com http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Moving our distrib to svnpub
>> This would be for the RCs as well? > Sure I will update the procedure as well. Ok, I'm not sure I see the point. The RCs will never be released and the whole point of this storage is for released stuff, right? The only point would be to keep things in dev/ as an archive. Not sure there's much value in that though. > But during vote time the candidate will be there: > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/maven/maven3/3.0.5 > when the vote passed > svn mv https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/maven/maven-3/3.0.5 > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/maven/maven--3/ OK, it is moved (not copied). My suggestion is this: Only check in candidates of things that could eventually be released (thus, not Maven Core RCs). Once released, we do a move from dev/ to release/. For dropped candidates, we delete them from dev/. /Anders > >> >>> Then once the vote has passed releasing is simple copy from >>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ to >>> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release (et voilà) >> >> Would we leave the released files in dev/ when copying, or should they >> be removed? And if we commit the RCs, should they be kept in dev/ or >> removed once we roll the real release? >> >> I guess I'm kind of wondering if dev/ should be some kind of archive. > That's just a sample of the tree :-) > I will move the dev content to release. >> If it supposed to be an archive (which includes the RCs), then maybe >> even re-rolled candidates should be kept as well? But that could be >> very confusing... >> >> /Anders >> >>> >>> For that we could use a per version model: >>> http://www.eu.apache.org/dist/maven/maven-3/3.0.4 >>> http://www.eu.apache.org/dist/maven/maven-2/2.2.1 >>> http://www.eu.apache.org/dist/maven/ant-tasks/ >>> >>> WDYT ? >>> >>> Note: I have created the issue >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-5224 if you want to follow >>> up. >>> >>> >>> 2012/8/22 Hervé BOUTEMY : IIUC, it's https, not http :) no objection here, just documentation to update [1] Regards, Hervé [1] http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/maven-core-release.html Le mercredi 22 août 2012 00:36:53 Olivier Lamy a écrit : > Hi, > Before the end of the year, all Apache projects must move their > distrib to svnpub (instead of using scp to people.a.o) > > It's as simple as having content from > http://www.us.apache.org/dist/maven/ available in > http://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/maven/ > This is for core distrib (maven 1,2.0,2.2.1,3 and ant task). > > No objections I do the stuff early next week ? - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Olivier Lamy >>> Talend: http://coders.talend.com >>> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy >>> >>> - >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >>> >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >> > > > > -- > Olivier Lamy > Talend: http://coders.talend.com > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Git as the canonical SCM
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 5:01 PM, Kristian Rosenvold wrote: [del] > Which makes me think we should consider such a switch an opportunity > to re-think some of our tooling > around multi-module projects. What the 99% others want (who're not > setting up a CI) is a checkout algorithm that builds the *vertical* > stack for a given plugin, not the horizontal top-level stack for all > the plugins (which is what we have currently). So if I checkout > "maven-ear-plugin", I would basically want something like this: > root-dir\ > maven-ear-plugin\ > maven-archiver\ > maven-filtering\ > plexus-archiver\ > plexus-utils > .. maybe more.. (probably configurable somewhere) I've lost count of the times I've been bug hunting starting at the plugin where the problem occurs and had to pull in dependencies until I have found the problem. Even if the repository doesn't allow this, tooling to help checkout as you describe would be great. Especially when things live in shared, plexus, plugins etc its a manual PITA looking at poms for scm sections and then checking them out. At least a re-think of the structure would help in understanding/explaining why things live where. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Git as the canonical SCM
Quoting Olivier Lamy (2012-09-04 22:23:11) ... > Due to lack of support of sparse checkout in git, I (perso) don't want > we have to create a git repo per plugin etc... > IMHO That will be a pain to manage. No longer true, git has sparse checkout support (I believe since 1.7.0). See http://git-scm.com/docs/git-read-tree.html (search for Sparse checkout section). There are multiple examples spread through the interwebs, one would be: http://jasonkarns.com/blog/subdirectory-checkouts-with-git-sparse-checkout/ And there's always shallow clones which are fine for sending format-patch(es). That said, the code should IMHO be split into repositories depending on their releases (i.e. code that gets releases simultaneously should be in one repo, code that has multiple parts which get their own release tags should be in separate repos) -- Stanislav Ochotnicky Software Engineer - Base Operating Systems Brno PGP: 7B087241 Red Hat Inc. http://cz.redhat.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Moving our distrib to svnpub
2012/9/5 Anders Hammar : >> For voting period the candidate files can be committed to the correct >> tree here https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ (instead of scp to >> people.a.o) > > This would be for the RCs as well? Sure I will update the procedure as well. But during vote time the candidate will be there: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/maven/maven3/3.0.5 when the vote passed svn mv https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/maven/maven-3/3.0.5 https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/maven/maven--3/ > >> Then once the vote has passed releasing is simple copy from >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ to >> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release (et voilà) > > Would we leave the released files in dev/ when copying, or should they > be removed? And if we commit the RCs, should they be kept in dev/ or > removed once we roll the real release? > > I guess I'm kind of wondering if dev/ should be some kind of archive. That's just a sample of the tree :-) I will move the dev content to release. > If it supposed to be an archive (which includes the RCs), then maybe > even re-rolled candidates should be kept as well? But that could be > very confusing... > > /Anders > >> >> For that we could use a per version model: >> http://www.eu.apache.org/dist/maven/maven-3/3.0.4 >> http://www.eu.apache.org/dist/maven/maven-2/2.2.1 >> http://www.eu.apache.org/dist/maven/ant-tasks/ >> >> WDYT ? >> >> Note: I have created the issue >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-5224 if you want to follow >> up. >> >> >> 2012/8/22 Hervé BOUTEMY : >>> IIUC, it's https, not http :) >>> >>> no objection here, just documentation to update [1] >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Hervé >>> >>> [1] http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/maven-core-release.html >>> >>> Le mercredi 22 août 2012 00:36:53 Olivier Lamy a écrit : Hi, Before the end of the year, all Apache projects must move their distrib to svnpub (instead of using scp to people.a.o) It's as simple as having content from http://www.us.apache.org/dist/maven/ available in http://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/maven/ This is for core distrib (maven 1,2.0,2.2.1,3 and ant task). No objections I do the stuff early next week ? >>> >>> - >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Olivier Lamy >> Talend: http://coders.talend.com >> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >> > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > -- Olivier Lamy Talend: http://coders.talend.com http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Moving our distrib to svnpub
> For voting period the candidate files can be committed to the correct > tree here https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ (instead of scp to > people.a.o) This would be for the RCs as well? > Then once the vote has passed releasing is simple copy from > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ to > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release (et voilà) Would we leave the released files in dev/ when copying, or should they be removed? And if we commit the RCs, should they be kept in dev/ or removed once we roll the real release? I guess I'm kind of wondering if dev/ should be some kind of archive. If it supposed to be an archive (which includes the RCs), then maybe even re-rolled candidates should be kept as well? But that could be very confusing... /Anders > > For that we could use a per version model: > http://www.eu.apache.org/dist/maven/maven-3/3.0.4 > http://www.eu.apache.org/dist/maven/maven-2/2.2.1 > http://www.eu.apache.org/dist/maven/ant-tasks/ > > WDYT ? > > Note: I have created the issue > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-5224 if you want to follow > up. > > > 2012/8/22 Hervé BOUTEMY : >> IIUC, it's https, not http :) >> >> no objection here, just documentation to update [1] >> >> Regards, >> >> Hervé >> >> [1] http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/maven-core-release.html >> >> Le mercredi 22 août 2012 00:36:53 Olivier Lamy a écrit : >>> Hi, >>> Before the end of the year, all Apache projects must move their >>> distrib to svnpub (instead of using scp to people.a.o) >>> >>> It's as simple as having content from >>> http://www.us.apache.org/dist/maven/ available in >>> http://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/maven/ >>> This is for core distrib (maven 1,2.0,2.2.1,3 and ant task). >>> >>> No objections I do the stuff early next week ? >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >> > > > > -- > Olivier Lamy > Talend: http://coders.talend.com > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: Git as the canonical SCM
I think we should move to git; probably starting with a few repositories. I will not go into the argument as to why (it's been covered like a zillion times, link by Andrew covers a lot of it), other than to mention that the immense ease of moving around in history means that I never have to consider a patch "stale" since I can easily review it at the point in history it was created; additionally there's a much-improved chance I can move this to the top of history without being stale) Basically I've been meaning to start av vote suggesting that we: 1) Decide to move *all* maven projects to git, time frame subject to project/asf/infra capacity. We're in no immense hurry. 2) Kick off the effort by moving 2-3 projects initially, 1-2 easy ones (just to get the general feel for how things work) and a hard one. Right now I'd suggest something like m3-core, surefire( or scm) and maven-plugins, the last being the hard one ;) I herby volunteer to do the donkey-work, including some massive filter-branch operations on the current asf maven-plugins git clone. I think we should split maven-plugins, because I think the solution chosen is optimized for the wrong uses cases, and it only helps for setting up CI jobs. The rest of the community basically has no value in the current set-up. Which makes me think we should consider such a switch an opportunity to re-think some of our tooling around multi-module projects. What the 99% others want (who're not setting up a CI) is a checkout algorithm that builds the *vertical* stack for a given plugin, not the horizontal top-level stack for all the plugins (which is what we have currently). So if I checkout "maven-ear-plugin", I would basically want something like this: root-dir\ maven-ear-plugin\ maven-archiver\ maven-filtering\ plexus-archiver\ plexus-utils .. maybe more.. (probably configurable somewhere) Now if the checkout would generate a synethetic parent pom with all these as modules, I could just load it all up in IDEA and be ready to go. I think something like this would have /real/ value to most of our users, whereas the current maven-plugins layout really only is valuable for whoever is configuring a CI to build maven-plugins. No matter what, I think there's very lfew practical use cases for having all the modules chunked together. Kristian 2012/9/4 Olivier Lamy : > 2012/9/4 Andrew Waterman : >> The drools guys did a really nice move from Subversion a few years back. >> >> http://blog.athico.com/2010/12/drools-migrated-to-git.html >> >> One of the key things they did, was reorganize their poms and project >> structure. >> >> I'd be willing to help out. I think there could be a lot more to this move >> than just importing from subversion, but it depends on what you guys want to >> do. > > Yup I agree. > I use git on other oss projects (Apache: cloudstack and non Apache: > jenkins ...) and git svn for some asf projects. > Due to lack of support of sparse checkout in git, I (perso) don't want > we have to create a git repo per plugin etc... > IMHO That will be a pain to manage. > >> >> best wishes, >> >> Andrew >> >> On Sep 4, 2012, at 3:09 PM, "Jason Pyeron" wrote: >> -Original Message- From: Jason van Zyl Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2012 15:55 How's Git doing at Apache these days? Anyone interested in pursuing putting Maven in Git as the canonical SCM? >>> >>> Comments from the peanut gallery: It would make it very nice to contribute >>> back. >>> Since I do not have a sandbox access I have thrown away fixes because there >>> was >>> no efficient way to track them until they were accepted as patches. (same >>> problem in struts, commons, ...) >>> >>> We would be very happy here at PD Inc if that was done. >>> >>> -Jason Pyeron >>> >>> -- >>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- >>> - - >>> - Jason Pyeron PD Inc. http://www.pdinc.us - >>> - Principal Consultant 10 West 24th Street #100- >>> - +1 (443) 269-1555 x333Baltimore, Maryland 21218 - >>> - - >>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- >>> This message is copyright PD Inc, subject to license 20080407P00. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> - >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >>> >> > > > > -- > Olivier Lamy > Talend: http://coders.talend.com > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail:
Re: Moving our distrib to svnpub
If you want to have a look at the new proposed tree, I have imported the content here https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/maven/ 2012/9/4 Olivier Lamy : > Back on this. > I wonder about changing a bit the distrib directory tree ? > > The goal is to ease release. > For voting period the candidate files can be committed to the correct > tree here https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ (instead of scp to > people.a.o) > Then once the vote has passed releasing is simple copy from > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/ to > https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release (et voilà) > > For that we could use a per version model: > http://www.eu.apache.org/dist/maven/maven-3/3.0.4 > http://www.eu.apache.org/dist/maven/maven-2/2.2.1 > http://www.eu.apache.org/dist/maven/ant-tasks/ > > WDYT ? > > Note: I have created the issue > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-5224 if you want to follow > up. > > > 2012/8/22 Hervé BOUTEMY : >> IIUC, it's https, not http :) >> >> no objection here, just documentation to update [1] >> >> Regards, >> >> Hervé >> >> [1] http://maven.apache.org/developers/release/maven-core-release.html >> >> Le mercredi 22 août 2012 00:36:53 Olivier Lamy a écrit : >>> Hi, >>> Before the end of the year, all Apache projects must move their >>> distrib to svnpub (instead of using scp to people.a.o) >>> >>> It's as simple as having content from >>> http://www.us.apache.org/dist/maven/ available in >>> http://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/maven/ >>> This is for core distrib (maven 1,2.0,2.2.1,3 and ant task). >>> >>> No objections I do the stuff early next week ? >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >> > > > > -- > Olivier Lamy > Talend: http://coders.talend.com > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy -- Olivier Lamy Talend: http://coders.talend.com http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Apache Maven Install plugin 2.4
+1 2012/9/3 Olivier Lamy : > Hi, > I'd like to release Maven Install plugin 2.4 > > We fixed 5 issues: > https://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?version=15112&styleName=Text&projectId=11136 > Staging repository: > https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-031/ > Staging site: http://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-install-plugin-2.4/ > (wait sync or have a look here > http://maventest.apache.org/plugins/maven-install-plugin-2.4/) > > Guide to testing staged releases: > http://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html > > Vote open for 72 hours. > > [ ] +1 > [ ] +0 > [ ] -1 > > > Thanks > -- > Olivier Lamy > Talend: http://coders.talend.com > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy -- Olivier Lamy Talend: http://coders.talend.com http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
