Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)
Hi, > On 19 Sep 2015, at 15:48, Ivan Čukić wrote: > >> I've made a wiki page, which says how to turn a pull request into >> a reviewboard submission. >> https://techbase.kde.org/Development/GithubMirror > > The next time I see you, you are getting a hug and a pint of apple fritter. I have been hoping for this more or less through the whole discussion. What contributors coming in through Github need is some (ideally scripted) setup of their remotes that let’s them easily submit review requests after cloning from Github. This cannot be that hard with Git. David, you rock. Mirko. -- Mirko Boehm | mi...@kde.org | KDE e.V. FSFE Fellow, FSFE Team Germany Qt Certified Specialist Request a meeting: https://doodle.com/mirkoboehm ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)
Hi David, Nice idea to have a wiki page explaining the process. I was going through the text and have some suggestions for some of the text on the wiki page. "GitHubMirror KDE is managing a mirror of projects.kde.org on Github. We want to make KDE sources easy to find, share and build upon; and most importantly we want your contributions to count towards your github profile :)" GitHub Mirror "GitHub is a Web-based Git repository hosting service, which offers all of the distributed revision control and source code management (SCM) functionality of Git as well as adding its own features. Unlike Git, which is strictly a command-line tool, GitHub provides a Web-based graphical interface and desktop as well as mobile integration. It also provides access control and several collaboration features such as bug tracking, feature requests, task management, and wikis for every project." ( source. wikipedia ). Github, altough proprietary is very popular among different communties and developers. We want to make KDE easily available to all so that it is easy to find, share and build upon. Therefore KDE is managing a mirror of all its projects, whose main location is projects.kde.org, on Github at https://github.com/kde . The contributions to the KDE project will also count towards your Github profile :). Please let me know if you have any questions/suggestions. Thanks On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 13:04:55 +0100 David Edmundson wrote: > > > > > > I was under the impression they were disabled by the options we > > > had selected. Unfortunately that is not the case. > > > > Thanks for clarifying on this. > > > > I hope they can still be disabled. > > > > They can't. I had spent some time looking before. Sorry. > > However, we have solid hard data that it's a non-issue. > > Gnome has been mirrored on github for nearly 2 years, in that time > GTK has had a grand total of 4 pull requests over time. > Most others (gedit, cheese, epiphany) have had 0. > > Interestingly they have had literally hundreds of github "forks", > which implies it has led to sustantiable numbers of patches back > using the traditional methods > > I've made a wiki page, which says how to turn a pull request into a > reviewboard submission. > https://techbase.kde.org/Development/GithubMirror > > If we get any questions we can then just copy and paste that, and > don't need to spend any time explaining. Bam, done. > > David -- Rajeev Bhatta ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)
On Saturday, September 19, 2015 16:34:59 Albert Astals Cid wrote: > El Dissabte, 19 de setembre de 2015, a les 16:23:26, Teo Mrnjavac va escriure: > > On Saturday, September 19, 2015 13:04:55 David Edmundson wrote: > > > > > I was under the impression they were disabled by the options we had > > > > > selected. Unfortunately that is not the case. > > > > > > > > Thanks for clarifying on this. > > > > > > > > I hope they can still be disabled. > > > > > > > > They can't. I had spent some time looking before. Sorry. > > > > > > However, we have solid hard data that it's a non-issue. > > > > > > Gnome has been mirrored on github for nearly 2 years, in that time GTK > > > has > > > had a grand total of 4 pull requests over time. > > > Most others (gedit, cheese, epiphany) have had 0. > > > > > > Interestingly they have had literally hundreds of github "forks", which > > > implies it has led to sustantiable numbers of patches back using the > > > traditional methods > > > > > > I've made a wiki page, which says how to turn a pull request into a > > > reviewboard submission. > > > https://techbase.kde.org/Development/GithubMirror > > > > > > If we get any questions we can then just copy and paste that, and don't > > > need to spend any time explaining. Bam, done. > > > > Thank you David, for your get-things-done approach in this controversial > > and tense situation. It is really much easier to solve than it seems from > > all these threads. > > > > I'm personally in favor of letting projects decide whether to allow GitHub > > pull requests or not, but regardless of the final decision it is good to > > already have practical solutions like this techbase entry. > > > > I find it unfortunate that some long time KDE contributors feel that KDE > > goals are threatened by all this. I understand their concerns, but I > > assign > > those concerns a different priority score. In fact, the inflexible policy > > towards 3rd party (including proprietary) infrastructure and processes we > > have in KDE deters me from bringing some of my own (currently > > GitHub-hosted) work under the KDE umbrella, as this would hinder some very > > productive working relationships with our downstreams and potentially > > result in *less* free open source software being produced, deployed and > > used. > > That's something you have convinced yourself about, you don't have proof. > This is not a repeatable experiment, of course I don't have science level proof. I even pointed out that my opinion stems from assigning different priority scores to the same concerns others have pointed out, concerns that I do recognize. Definitive proof could only be through hindsight after proceeding. The fact that you complain about the lack of proof is a bit baffling, as proof of the outcome for this kind of hypothetical scenario is something that no one can possibly produce without a crystal ball. This is a social, people-herding issue. The best I can give you is a maintainer's assessment, and that's what I wrote, based on the knowledge I have of said downstream relationships. You may agree or disagree, but I don't think it makes much sense to complain about lack of proof. Cheers, -- Teo Mrnjavac http://teom.org | t...@kde.org ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)
El Dissabte, 19 de setembre de 2015, a les 16:23:26, Teo Mrnjavac va escriure: > On Saturday, September 19, 2015 13:04:55 David Edmundson wrote: > > > > I was under the impression they were disabled by the options we had > > > > selected. Unfortunately that is not the case. > > > > > > Thanks for clarifying on this. > > > > > > I hope they can still be disabled. > > > > > > They can't. I had spent some time looking before. Sorry. > > > > However, we have solid hard data that it's a non-issue. > > > > Gnome has been mirrored on github for nearly 2 years, in that time GTK has > > had a grand total of 4 pull requests over time. > > Most others (gedit, cheese, epiphany) have had 0. > > > > Interestingly they have had literally hundreds of github "forks", which > > implies it has led to sustantiable numbers of patches back using the > > traditional methods > > > > I've made a wiki page, which says how to turn a pull request into a > > reviewboard submission. > > https://techbase.kde.org/Development/GithubMirror > > > > If we get any questions we can then just copy and paste that, and don't > > need to spend any time explaining. Bam, done. > > Thank you David, for your get-things-done approach in this controversial and > tense situation. It is really much easier to solve than it seems from all > these threads. > > I'm personally in favor of letting projects decide whether to allow GitHub > pull requests or not, but regardless of the final decision it is good to > already have practical solutions like this techbase entry. > > I find it unfortunate that some long time KDE contributors feel that KDE > goals are threatened by all this. I understand their concerns, but I assign > those concerns a different priority score. In fact, the inflexible policy > towards 3rd party (including proprietary) infrastructure and processes we > have in KDE deters me from bringing some of my own (currently > GitHub-hosted) work under the KDE umbrella, as this would hinder some very > productive working relationships with our downstreams and potentially > result in *less* free open source software being produced, deployed and > used. That's something you have convinced yourself about, you don't have proof. Cheers, Albert ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)
On Saturday, September 19, 2015 13:04:55 David Edmundson wrote: > > > I was under the impression they were disabled by the options we had > > > selected. Unfortunately that is not the case. > > > > Thanks for clarifying on this. > > > > I hope they can still be disabled. > > > > They can't. I had spent some time looking before. Sorry. > > However, we have solid hard data that it's a non-issue. > > Gnome has been mirrored on github for nearly 2 years, in that time GTK has > had a grand total of 4 pull requests over time. > Most others (gedit, cheese, epiphany) have had 0. > > Interestingly they have had literally hundreds of github "forks", which > implies it has led to sustantiable numbers of patches back using the > traditional methods > > I've made a wiki page, which says how to turn a pull request into a > reviewboard submission. > https://techbase.kde.org/Development/GithubMirror > > If we get any questions we can then just copy and paste that, and don't > need to spend any time explaining. Bam, done. > Thank you David, for your get-things-done approach in this controversial and tense situation. It is really much easier to solve than it seems from all these threads. I'm personally in favor of letting projects decide whether to allow GitHub pull requests or not, but regardless of the final decision it is good to already have practical solutions like this techbase entry. I find it unfortunate that some long time KDE contributors feel that KDE goals are threatened by all this. I understand their concerns, but I assign those concerns a different priority score. In fact, the inflexible policy towards 3rd party (including proprietary) infrastructure and processes we have in KDE deters me from bringing some of my own (currently GitHub-hosted) work under the KDE umbrella, as this would hinder some very productive working relationships with our downstreams and potentially result in *less* free open source software being produced, deployed and used. It is also a fact that KDE is an aging community, and in its future I expect a slow decline unless we find a way to bring in a steady influx of new contributors. Recruiting a new generation of hackers is something that's just not happening fast enough at this point (our yearly GSoC stats are an indication of that). GitHub could be a very powerful instrument in turning this trend around by tapping into a huge talent pool and pushing people towards our own infrastructure while still allowing them to get started through an environment they already know. Cheers, -- Teo Mrnjavac http://teom.org | t...@kde.org ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)
David, > I've made a wiki page, which says how to turn a pull request into > a reviewboard submission. > https://techbase.kde.org/Development/GithubMirror The next time I see you, you are getting a hug and a pint of apple fritter. Cheers, Ivan Cheerio, Ivan -- KDE, ivan.cu...@kde.org, http://cukic.co/ gpg key id: 850B6F76 On 19 September 2015 at 14:04, David Edmundson wrote: > >> > >> > I was under the impression they were disabled by the options we had >> > selected. Unfortunately that is not the case. >> >> Thanks for clarifying on this. >> >> I hope they can still be disabled. >> > They can't. I had spent some time looking before. Sorry. > > However, we have solid hard data that it's a non-issue. > > Gnome has been mirrored on github for nearly 2 years, in that time GTK has > had a grand total of 4 pull requests over time. > Most others (gedit, cheese, epiphany) have had 0. > > Interestingly they have had literally hundreds of github "forks", which > implies it has led to sustantiable numbers of patches back using the > traditional methods > > I've made a wiki page, which says how to turn a pull request into a > reviewboard submission. > https://techbase.kde.org/Development/GithubMirror > > If we get any questions we can then just copy and paste that, and don't need > to spend any time explaining. Bam, done. > > David > > > > > ___ > kde-community mailing list > kde-community@kde.org > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)
> > > > I was under the impression they were disabled by the options we had > > selected. Unfortunately that is not the case. > > Thanks for clarifying on this. > > I hope they can still be disabled. > > They can't. I had spent some time looking before. Sorry. However, we have solid hard data that it's a non-issue. Gnome has been mirrored on github for nearly 2 years, in that time GTK has had a grand total of 4 pull requests over time. Most others (gedit, cheese, epiphany) have had 0. Interestingly they have had literally hundreds of github "forks", which implies it has led to sustantiable numbers of patches back using the traditional methods I've made a wiki page, which says how to turn a pull request into a reviewboard submission. https://techbase.kde.org/Development/GithubMirror If we get any questions we can then just copy and paste that, and don't need to spend any time explaining. Bam, done. David ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)
Am Samstag, 19. September 2015, 10:20:36 CEST schrieb Ben Cooksley: > On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 10:02 AM, Martin Steigerwald > wrote: […] > > Am Freitag, 18. September 2015, 23:22:41 CEST schrieb Friedrich W. H. > > > > Kossebau: > >> For the first, my answer is not: mirror on github, but rather: make this > >> info better accessable (heck, perhaps simply put in the About dialog, in > >> a > >> new tab "Developers"). > > > > I think its even possible to just mentioning that in any github.com/kde > > page. > > > > "You are looking for our code on github.com? > > > > We don´t use github.com due to …, but you can find out code on … and we > > also have a nice way to provide reviews in … and our task and project > > management is at … > > > > We look forward to your contributions." > > > > So I see no need to provide an actual mirror of the source code in order > > to > > point to KDE infrastructure. > > Unfortunately they have a limit on the description length we can place > there of 120 characters. A "readme.md" file can provide for a longer description. Or a github.io page. > > I was a bit confused as first there was talk about disabling pull > > requests. > > Yet now the github.com/kde mirror is up, but I also read its not possible > > to disable pull requests. I´d expected that someone would check this > > before the move. > > I was under the impression they were disabled by the options we had > selected. Unfortunately that is not the case. Thanks for clarifying on this. I hope they can still be disabled. > > Anyway, for bug triaging I will just look at bugzilla for now. And since I > > didn´t write more than a few lines of code so far, except for this idea I > > leave this discussion to those who contributed more code. > > Github Issues are not enabled, so this won't be a problem. Thanks, -- Martin ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)
On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 10:02 AM, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > Hello Friedrich, Hi Martin, > > Am Freitag, 18. September 2015, 23:22:41 CEST schrieb Friedrich W. H. > Kossebau: >> For the first, my answer is not: mirror on github, but rather: make this >> info better accessable (heck, perhaps simply put in the About dialog, in a >> new tab "Developers"). > > I think its even possible to just mentioning that in any github.com/kde page. > > "You are looking for our code on github.com? > > We don´t use github.com due to …, but you can find out code on … and we also > have a nice way to provide reviews in … and our task and project management is > at … > > We look forward to your contributions." > > So I see no need to provide an actual mirror of the source code in order to > point to KDE infrastructure. Unfortunately they have a limit on the description length we can place there of 120 characters. > > > I was a bit confused as first there was talk about disabling pull requests. > Yet now the github.com/kde mirror is up, but I also read its not possible to > disable pull requests. I´d expected that someone would check this before the > move. I was under the impression they were disabled by the options we had selected. Unfortunately that is not the case. > > > Anyway, for bug triaging I will just look at bugzilla for now. And since I > didn´t write more than a few lines of code so far, except for this idea I > leave this discussion to those who contributed more code. Github Issues are not enabled, so this won't be a problem. > > Thanks, > -- > Martin Cheers, Ben > ___ > kde-community mailing list > kde-community@kde.org > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)
Hello Friedrich, Am Freitag, 18. September 2015, 23:22:41 CEST schrieb Friedrich W. H. Kossebau: > For the first, my answer is not: mirror on github, but rather: make this > info better accessable (heck, perhaps simply put in the About dialog, in a > new tab "Developers"). I think its even possible to just mentioning that in any github.com/kde page. "You are looking for our code on github.com? We don´t use github.com due to …, but you can find out code on … and we also have a nice way to provide reviews in … and our task and project management is at … We look forward to your contributions." So I see no need to provide an actual mirror of the source code in order to point to KDE infrastructure. I was a bit confused as first there was talk about disabling pull requests. Yet now the github.com/kde mirror is up, but I also read its not possible to disable pull requests. I´d expected that someone would check this before the move. Anyway, for bug triaging I will just look at bugzilla for now. And since I didn´t write more than a few lines of code so far, except for this idea I leave this discussion to those who contributed more code. Thanks, -- Martin ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)
On 18 September 2015 at 23:15, Ivan Čukić wrote: > We should probably put something like LLVM guys did in the project > description instead of actually having the real description. > > https://github.com/llvm-mirror/llvm >> Mirror of official llvm git repository located at >> http://llvm.org/git/llvm. Updated every five minutes. >> http://llvm.org > Sure, this is a github's own "Description" field: http://i.imgur.com/VjlXn3c.png It supports 3 lines of text or so plus a website filed. The "Website" field could be set to a project's home page; projects.kde.org/* as default but maybe something better grabbed from our metadata, e.g. https://community.kde.org/Frameworks for KF5. So do we still need to alter the READMEs? -- regards, Jaroslaw Staniek KDE: : A world-wide network of software engineers, artists, writers, translators : and facilitators committed to Free Software development - http://kde.org Calligra Suite: : A graphic art and office suite - http://calligra.org Kexi: : A visual database apps builder - http://calligra.org/kexi Qt Certified Specialist: : http://www.linkedin.com/in/jstaniek ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)
Am Samstag, 19. September 2015, 08:37:54 schrieb Ben Cooksley: > On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 8:10 AM, Friedrich W. H. Kossebau > > wrote: > > Am Freitag, 18. September 2015, 17:12:12 schrieb Boudhayan Gupta: > > Can we please only mirror those projects whose maintainers are okay with > > the added workload due to another public interface which allows > > interaction from 3rd-party? Too many people will not get that this is > > only a mirror, even if you put it in bold there. Or worse, not accept it > > is a mirror, because their time is more valueable than the time of the > > maintainers of course. > > > > I have no time (and actually also no interest) to care for people poking > > via github (incl. the time needed to redirect them to the real official > > KDE infrastructure and any bad vibrations because having to argue why > > I/we do not support github really). Other people might have that time and > > interest, so their decision. > > But I don't. I joined KDE for some reason and am doing my FLOSS software > > development here, because of certain values. > > Same would be true for sourceforge.net, gitlab.com, code.google.com (okay, > > dead) or whereever else some people think we should mirror because it's > > where "the people" are currently. > > > > So as maintainer I would like to have at least the repos of Okteta, > > libkoralle, cagibi removed from the official KDE github page. > > Sorry, but an incomplete mirror would cost additional effort to > maintain, as sysadmin would have to maintain a list of repositories > which were blacklisted. Could that effort not be crowd-sourced, as with the build metadata? > Note that because a chunk of the code that drives this is in bash, it > is not easy to create such a list easily. > > Additionally, an incomplete mirror would be confusing to those who > expect the mirror to be complete - so this blacklist would result in > Sysadmin receving queries of "why isn't this repository on Github?". Who would expect the mirror to be complete? Besides, that could be mentioned in the description on github.com/KDE: "Official mirror of the KDE project. Only contains repos of projects whose maintainers support it." And "KDE Github Mirror" perhaps should be "KDE Github Readonly Mirror". > I suggest you instead put a clear notice in the README file noting > that patches and other code contributions should be submitted via our > usual infrastructure. People do not read READMEs, I lost my hopes there at least. Because most READMEs are outdated/unmaintained. So not really sure people can be blamed for that behaviour. > If people do ignore that notice and submit stuff via Github pull > requests, they can be handled by the bot suggested on the other thread > - or simply ignored (as the person failed to read our instructions). Which opens a chance for people being pissed off because their effort on creating a patch is ignored, when they just missed the note that it's not possible. And I do not like to piss off people. But I also do not like using github for my FLOSS work. So now I feel forced to support people on github -> me not happy, questioning KDE values. So if I look at the problems presented initially in look for a solution: * people not finding our git repositories * people being surprised that our code is not on github * some projects starting to use github in addition to our own infrastructure For the first, my answer is not: mirror on github, but rather: make this info better accessable (heck, perhaps simply put in the About dialog, in a new tab "Developers"). People who are surprised our code is not on github: have a page explaining why. Education is needed. If some projects started to use github, they might have specific needs, which should be investigated and learned from how we could improve our infrastructure to meet that. I miss to see why e.g. Okteta code should be mirrored on github officially by KDE, if the full power of github is not used. This does not make any sense to me. Who is targetted here, for what? I only see lose-lose, making ourselves feel our infrastructure is anything but usable and giving a bad experience on github ("suckers just have bots telling me to represent my patch in some alien infrastructure that I first have to learn now additionally, why here and not using github?!1"). Cheers Friedrich ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)
We should probably put something like LLVM guys did in the project description instead of actually having the real description. https://github.com/llvm-mirror/llvm > Mirror of official llvm git repository located at > http://llvm.org/git/llvm. Updated every five minutes. > http://llvm.org Cheers, Ivan Cheerio, Ivan -- KDE, ivan.cu...@kde.org, http://cukic.co/ gpg key id: 850B6F76 On 18 September 2015 at 23:09, Ben Cooksley wrote: > On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Jaroslaw Staniek wrote: >> On 18 September 2015 at 22:37, Ben Cooksley wrote: >>> On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 8:10 AM, Friedrich W. H. Kossebau >>> wrote: Hi, >>> >>> Hi, >>> Am Freitag, 18. September 2015, 17:12:12 schrieb Boudhayan Gupta: > Ladies and gentlemen, as you read this mail github.com/kde is being > populated by the initial sync of all repositories. Pardon for the late input, missed the dynamic of the people behind this idea (and actually expected it would be shot down, at least to me it seems not a good idea to add value to a proprietary platform by also adding our source code there). Can we please only mirror those projects whose maintainers are okay with the added workload due to another public interface which allows interaction from 3rd-party? Too many people will not get that this is only a mirror, even if you put it in bold there. Or worse, not accept it is a mirror, because their time is more valueable than the time of the maintainers of course. I have no time (and actually also no interest) to care for people poking via github (incl. the time needed to redirect them to the real official KDE infrastructure and any bad vibrations because having to argue why I/we do not support github really). Other people might have that time and interest, so their decision. But I don't. I joined KDE for some reason and am doing my FLOSS software development here, because of certain values. Same would be true for sourceforge.net, gitlab.com, code.google.com (okay, dead) or whereever else some people think we should mirror because it's where "the people" are currently. So as maintainer I would like to have at least the repos of Okteta, libkoralle, cagibi removed from the official KDE github page. >>> >>> Sorry, but an incomplete mirror would cost additional effort to >>> maintain, as sysadmin would have to maintain a list of repositories >>> which were blacklisted. >>> Note that because a chunk of the code that drives this is in bash, it >>> is not easy to create such a list easily. >>> >>> Additionally, an incomplete mirror would be confusing to those who >>> expect the mirror to be complete - so this blacklist would result in >>> Sysadmin receving queries of "why isn't this repository on Github?". >>> >> >> Wouldn't lack of opt-in from Friedrich just mean that the bot will be >> enabled with a friendly note (i.e. the default)? >> Allright, he (and his projects' members) won't be 'spammed'. >> >>> I suggest you instead put a clear notice in the README file noting >>> that patches and other code contributions should be submitted via our >>> usual infrastructure. >> >> This addition to README.md could be hopefully scripted in a clever way >> as we have so many projects. >> Myself I use README.md files for some time as KF5 do, so replacing >> these a whole README.md with a standard disclaimer is not an option; >> just saying, I know you did not mean replacing of couse. >> I'd welcome a nicely crafted template. > > +1. Note that Phabricator, once we roll it out will also display the > content of README.md files - so please ensure such a template is > crafted in such a way that people can clearly understand what is meant > if they're browsing the repository via Phabricator in the future. > >> >> -- >> regards, Jaroslaw Staniek > > Thanks, > Ben > >> >> KDE: >> : A world-wide network of software engineers, artists, writers, translators >> : and facilitators committed to Free Software development - http://kde.org >> Calligra Suite: >> : A graphic art and office suite - http://calligra.org >> Kexi: >> : A visual database apps builder - http://calligra.org/kexi >> Qt Certified Specialist: >> : http://www.linkedin.com/in/jstaniek >> ___ >> kde-community mailing list >> kde-community@kde.org >> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community > ___ > kde-community mailing list > kde-community@kde.org > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)
On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Jaroslaw Staniek wrote: > On 18 September 2015 at 22:37, Ben Cooksley wrote: >> On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 8:10 AM, Friedrich W. H. Kossebau >> wrote: >>> Hi, >> >> Hi, >> >>> >>> Am Freitag, 18. September 2015, 17:12:12 schrieb Boudhayan Gupta: Ladies and gentlemen, as you read this mail github.com/kde is being populated by the initial sync of all repositories. >>> >>> Pardon for the late input, missed the dynamic of the people behind this idea >>> (and actually expected it would be shot down, at least to me it seems not a >>> good idea to add value to a proprietary platform by also adding our source >>> code there). >>> >>> Can we please only mirror those projects whose maintainers are okay with the >>> added workload due to another public interface which allows interaction from >>> 3rd-party? Too many people will not get that this is only a mirror, even if >>> you put it in bold there. Or worse, not accept it is a mirror, because their >>> time is more valueable than the time of the maintainers of course. >>> >>> I have no time (and actually also no interest) to care for people poking via >>> github (incl. the time needed to redirect them to the real official KDE >>> infrastructure and any bad vibrations because having to argue why I/we do >>> not >>> support github really). Other people might have that time and interest, so >>> their decision. >>> But I don't. I joined KDE for some reason and am doing my FLOSS software >>> development here, because of certain values. >>> Same would be true for sourceforge.net, gitlab.com, code.google.com (okay, >>> dead) or whereever else some people think we should mirror because it's >>> where >>> "the people" are currently. >>> >>> So as maintainer I would like to have at least the repos of Okteta, >>> libkoralle, cagibi removed from the official KDE github page. >> >> Sorry, but an incomplete mirror would cost additional effort to >> maintain, as sysadmin would have to maintain a list of repositories >> which were blacklisted. >> Note that because a chunk of the code that drives this is in bash, it >> is not easy to create such a list easily. >> >> Additionally, an incomplete mirror would be confusing to those who >> expect the mirror to be complete - so this blacklist would result in >> Sysadmin receving queries of "why isn't this repository on Github?". >> > > Wouldn't lack of opt-in from Friedrich just mean that the bot will be > enabled with a friendly note (i.e. the default)? > Allright, he (and his projects' members) won't be 'spammed'. > >> I suggest you instead put a clear notice in the README file noting >> that patches and other code contributions should be submitted via our >> usual infrastructure. > > This addition to README.md could be hopefully scripted in a clever way > as we have so many projects. > Myself I use README.md files for some time as KF5 do, so replacing > these a whole README.md with a standard disclaimer is not an option; > just saying, I know you did not mean replacing of couse. > I'd welcome a nicely crafted template. +1. Note that Phabricator, once we roll it out will also display the content of README.md files - so please ensure such a template is crafted in such a way that people can clearly understand what is meant if they're browsing the repository via Phabricator in the future. > > -- > regards, Jaroslaw Staniek Thanks, Ben > > KDE: > : A world-wide network of software engineers, artists, writers, translators > : and facilitators committed to Free Software development - http://kde.org > Calligra Suite: > : A graphic art and office suite - http://calligra.org > Kexi: > : A visual database apps builder - http://calligra.org/kexi > Qt Certified Specialist: > : http://www.linkedin.com/in/jstaniek > ___ > kde-community mailing list > kde-community@kde.org > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)
On 18 September 2015 at 22:37, Ben Cooksley wrote: > On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 8:10 AM, Friedrich W. H. Kossebau > wrote: >> Hi, > > Hi, > >> >> Am Freitag, 18. September 2015, 17:12:12 schrieb Boudhayan Gupta: >>> Ladies and gentlemen, as you read this mail github.com/kde is being >>> populated by the initial sync of all repositories. >> >> Pardon for the late input, missed the dynamic of the people behind this idea >> (and actually expected it would be shot down, at least to me it seems not a >> good idea to add value to a proprietary platform by also adding our source >> code there). >> >> Can we please only mirror those projects whose maintainers are okay with the >> added workload due to another public interface which allows interaction from >> 3rd-party? Too many people will not get that this is only a mirror, even if >> you put it in bold there. Or worse, not accept it is a mirror, because their >> time is more valueable than the time of the maintainers of course. >> >> I have no time (and actually also no interest) to care for people poking via >> github (incl. the time needed to redirect them to the real official KDE >> infrastructure and any bad vibrations because having to argue why I/we do not >> support github really). Other people might have that time and interest, so >> their decision. >> But I don't. I joined KDE for some reason and am doing my FLOSS software >> development here, because of certain values. >> Same would be true for sourceforge.net, gitlab.com, code.google.com (okay, >> dead) or whereever else some people think we should mirror because it's where >> "the people" are currently. >> >> So as maintainer I would like to have at least the repos of Okteta, >> libkoralle, cagibi removed from the official KDE github page. > > Sorry, but an incomplete mirror would cost additional effort to > maintain, as sysadmin would have to maintain a list of repositories > which were blacklisted. > Note that because a chunk of the code that drives this is in bash, it > is not easy to create such a list easily. > > Additionally, an incomplete mirror would be confusing to those who > expect the mirror to be complete - so this blacklist would result in > Sysadmin receving queries of "why isn't this repository on Github?". > Wouldn't lack of opt-in from Friedrich just mean that the bot will be enabled with a friendly note (i.e. the default)? Allright, he (and his projects' members) won't be 'spammed'. > I suggest you instead put a clear notice in the README file noting > that patches and other code contributions should be submitted via our > usual infrastructure. This addition to README.md could be hopefully scripted in a clever way as we have so many projects. Myself I use README.md files for some time as KF5 do, so replacing these a whole README.md with a standard disclaimer is not an option; just saying, I know you did not mean replacing of couse. I'd welcome a nicely crafted template. -- regards, Jaroslaw Staniek KDE: : A world-wide network of software engineers, artists, writers, translators : and facilitators committed to Free Software development - http://kde.org Calligra Suite: : A graphic art and office suite - http://calligra.org Kexi: : A visual database apps builder - http://calligra.org/kexi Qt Certified Specialist: : http://www.linkedin.com/in/jstaniek ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)
On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 8:10 AM, Friedrich W. H. Kossebau wrote: > Hi, Hi, > > Am Freitag, 18. September 2015, 17:12:12 schrieb Boudhayan Gupta: >> Ladies and gentlemen, as you read this mail github.com/kde is being >> populated by the initial sync of all repositories. > > Pardon for the late input, missed the dynamic of the people behind this idea > (and actually expected it would be shot down, at least to me it seems not a > good idea to add value to a proprietary platform by also adding our source > code there). > > Can we please only mirror those projects whose maintainers are okay with the > added workload due to another public interface which allows interaction from > 3rd-party? Too many people will not get that this is only a mirror, even if > you put it in bold there. Or worse, not accept it is a mirror, because their > time is more valueable than the time of the maintainers of course. > > I have no time (and actually also no interest) to care for people poking via > github (incl. the time needed to redirect them to the real official KDE > infrastructure and any bad vibrations because having to argue why I/we do not > support github really). Other people might have that time and interest, so > their decision. > But I don't. I joined KDE for some reason and am doing my FLOSS software > development here, because of certain values. > Same would be true for sourceforge.net, gitlab.com, code.google.com (okay, > dead) or whereever else some people think we should mirror because it's where > "the people" are currently. > > So as maintainer I would like to have at least the repos of Okteta, > libkoralle, cagibi removed from the official KDE github page. Sorry, but an incomplete mirror would cost additional effort to maintain, as sysadmin would have to maintain a list of repositories which were blacklisted. Note that because a chunk of the code that drives this is in bash, it is not easy to create such a list easily. Additionally, an incomplete mirror would be confusing to those who expect the mirror to be complete - so this blacklist would result in Sysadmin receving queries of "why isn't this repository on Github?". I suggest you instead put a clear notice in the README file noting that patches and other code contributions should be submitted via our usual infrastructure. If people do ignore that notice and submit stuff via Github pull requests, they can be handled by the bot suggested on the other thread - or simply ignored (as the person failed to read our instructions). > > Cheers > Friedrich Regards, Ben > ___ > kde-community mailing list > kde-community@kde.org > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)
On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 9:10 PM, Friedrich W. H. Kossebau wrote: > Hi, > > Am Freitag, 18. September 2015, 17:12:12 schrieb Boudhayan Gupta: > > Ladies and gentlemen, as you read this mail github.com/kde is being > > populated by the initial sync of all repositories. > > Pardon for the late input, missed the dynamic of the people behind this > idea > (and actually expected it would be shot down, at least to me it seems not a > good idea to add value to a proprietary platform by also adding our source > code there). > > Can we please only mirror those projects whose maintainers are okay with > the > added workload due to another public interface which allows interaction > from > 3rd-party? Too many people will not get that this is only a mirror, even if > you put it in bold there. Or worse, not accept it is a mirror, because > their > time is more valueable than the time of the maintainers of course. > > I have no time (and actually also no interest) to care for people poking via > github (incl. the time needed to redirect them to the real official KDE > infrastructure and any bad vibrations because having to argue why I/we do > not > support github really). Other people might have that time and interest, so > their decision. > But I don't. I joined KDE for some reason and am doing my FLOSS software > development here, because of certain values. > Same would be true for sourceforge.net, gitlab.com, code.google.com (okay, > dead) or whereever else some people think we should mirror because it's > where > "the people" are currently. > > So as maintainer I would like to have at least the repos of Okteta, > libkoralle, cagibi removed from the official KDE github page. There shouldn't be any extra workload. Can we at least wait until we see if it's a problem before we try and solve it? David Cheers > Friedrich > ___ > kde-community mailing list > kde-community@kde.org > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
[kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)
Hi, Am Freitag, 18. September 2015, 17:12:12 schrieb Boudhayan Gupta: > Ladies and gentlemen, as you read this mail github.com/kde is being > populated by the initial sync of all repositories. Pardon for the late input, missed the dynamic of the people behind this idea (and actually expected it would be shot down, at least to me it seems not a good idea to add value to a proprietary platform by also adding our source code there). Can we please only mirror those projects whose maintainers are okay with the added workload due to another public interface which allows interaction from 3rd-party? Too many people will not get that this is only a mirror, even if you put it in bold there. Or worse, not accept it is a mirror, because their time is more valueable than the time of the maintainers of course. I have no time (and actually also no interest) to care for people poking via github (incl. the time needed to redirect them to the real official KDE infrastructure and any bad vibrations because having to argue why I/we do not support github really). Other people might have that time and interest, so their decision. But I don't. I joined KDE for some reason and am doing my FLOSS software development here, because of certain values. Same would be true for sourceforge.net, gitlab.com, code.google.com (okay, dead) or whereever else some people think we should mirror because it's where "the people" are currently. So as maintainer I would like to have at least the repos of Okteta, libkoralle, cagibi removed from the official KDE github page. Cheers Friedrich ___ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community