As a ASF project we MUST have a repo in Apache land:
http://www.apache.org/dev/writable-git
ASF releases must be cut from the canonical ASF Git repositories.
The absolute minimum is therefore:
- working on somewhere else
- starting a release:
-- pull all changes to local
-- push to ASF-repo
--
On 2014-05-07, Matt Sicker wrote:
The Camel project takes PRs from GH, though, so they may have some useful
info about that.
http://camel.apache.org/contributing.html#Contributing-PullrequestatGithub
sounds like manually merging the PR to the ASF git repo.
Stefan
I think it would work better to just do development on ASF, but accept pull
requests via GitHub somewhat manually. This is how it's done with Apache
Camel: http://camel.apache.org/contributing.html
So it's done manually. Plus, nobody can write to the ASF GitHub repos
without pulling some strings
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/user/repo branchname
Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:
https://github.com/apache/ant/1234.patch
To close this pull request, make a commit to your
And here's some more info about how to do that.
On 11 May 2014 15:04, Matt Sicker boa...@gmail.com wrote:
I think it would work better to just do development on ASF, but accept
pull requests via GitHub somewhat manually. This is how it's done with
Apache Camel:
I added my GH account info a while ago, but it only added my account to the
ASF organization on GH. It's kinda buggy with linking histories even, and
INFRA isn't too interested in resolving those issues since it's outside ASF.
The Camel project takes PRs from GH, though, so they may have some
On 2014-05-07, Antoine Levy Lambert wrote:
I don’t know whether an option of using only github and not the ASF
hosted git is acceptable for the ASF ? for the Ant committers ?
For the ASF the only thing that matters is that the ASF git instance is
the source of truth. Tags are there and the
On 2014-05-06, Matt Sicker wrote:
Git allows you to do both. You can auto-merge from GH, but I'm not
sure how you can even get write access to ASF GH repos.
You don't, you commit to the ASF repo and it gets mirrored.
IIRC some projects have their own forks of the ASF mirror and accept
pull
I mean how do you accept pull requests? You wouldn't be able to do it
through GitHub. You'd have to manually pull the branch from GitHub like the
name pull request implies. If you could commit to GitHub, then you could
add a remote besides origin for GitHub, then pull from the GitHub remote,
then
Matt, Jesse,
I think that both of you are basically saying that accepting pull requests
entered in github is going to be more manual work,
including more command line work, in the case of a migration to
git-wip-us.apache.org as opposed to migrating to use only github.
I don’t know whether an
While I was getting to know better another ASF project Spark [1], I have found
that they use git, and they heavily use github in their workflow. So I asked
them how they work it it [2].
Of course the ASF git repo is the official source repo. But contributions are
asked to go through github. A
On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 8:22 AM, Nicolas Lalevée
nicolas.lale...@hibnet.org wrote:
once a committer is satisfied with the result, the work is being imported
into the git repo with a script
A much more straightforward workflow is just to do all work in the
GitHub repo, accepting pull requests
Git allows you to do both. You can auto-merge from GH, but I'm not sure how
you can even get write access to ASF GH repos.
On Monday, 5 May 2014, Jesse Glick typr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 8:22 AM, Nicolas Lalevée
nicolas.lale...@hibnet.org javascript:; wrote:
once a
Hello Maarten,
I do not know a lot about git either.
Here are the advantages I see in migrating to git :
- git allows third-parties to clone an original repository and in fact to
create a fork while keeping the possibility of contributing back what they have
created if they want to, and also
If you don't mind some recommendations from the peanut gallery (been using
git for 5 years now)
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 9:53 AM, Antoine Levy-Lambert anto...@gmx.dewrote:
Hello Maarten,
I do not know a lot about git either.
Here are the advantages I see in migrating to git :
- git
Git is great for making small branches for things like bugfixes, features,
refactors, etc. That plus it's way faster than Subversion. Freaky fast.
On 30 April 2014 09:01, Josh Suereth joshua.suer...@gmail.com wrote:
If you don't mind some recommendations from the peanut gallery (been using
Even if I share some of your enthusiasm with git, don't forget that git at the
ASF isn't like git in github. Pull request, code review and so on is not as
integrated as in github.
Nicolas
Le 30 avr. 2014 à 16:01, Josh Suereth joshua.suer...@gmail.com a écrit :
If you don't mind some
Could we conceive of having a GitHub project, that serves as a point for
pull-requests and other community work and at the same time have a git repo at
Apache that syncs with this?
André-John
Sent from my phone. Envoyé depuis mon téléphone.
On 30 Apr 2014, at 17:33, Nicolas Lalevée
I'd argue that the convenience of pull requests in ASF should be a fixable
problem. If ASF is running repositories, Gerrit would be a great way to
set up an elegant ASF workflow...
In any case, I applaud the effort to migrate to get and understand the
concerns. My experience has been truly
Fair point.
My experience has been the same. Was a little stubborn at first, but once I
made the move from Subversion I haven't looked back. One thing that I found it
fixed, in my environment, is avoiding devs using the main source control as a
form of backup.
André-John
Sent from my
Apache projects are already mirrored at GitHub.
https://github.com/apache/
We just need better support for merging back from GitHub (or even being
able to write to the GitHub repositories).
On 30 April 2014 18:00, Andre-John Mas andrejohn@gmail.com wrote:
Fair point.
My experience has
21 matches
Mail list logo
