Re: Project status

The current PRs on the log4cxx github are most likely invalid at this point. Going by the commit dates of 2003(as well as looking at the license), the version that is on there does appear to be from that time period, and thus the pull requests are so old that the issues that they refer to have pro

Re: Project status

Well, after the migration, I bet the PRs will have super merge conflicts unless they do a full rebase. I don't know how that'd work, either. It'd probably be easier for the individuals to create a diff, check out the new history, then apply that diff, commit, and force push over their old PR. On 1

Re: Project status

Guten Tag Matt Sicker, am Freitag, 17. März 2017 um 19:36 schrieben Sie: > Unfortunately, I don't think the history will have the same commit > ids, so the PRs won't be valid anymore. They'll have to rebase on the new > history. But things might not be lost at all and one could send them a messa

Re: Project status

I haven't figured that part out yet (we're working on doing that in commons-pool right now), but there's a setting somewhere that determines what gets mirrored to GitHub. When we switch over to git, we'll update that settings so that the git mirror is updated. Unfortunately, I don't think the histo

Re: Project status

Guten Tag Matt Sicker, am Freitag, 17. März 2017 um 18:27 schrieben Sie: > You can also add > GitHub as an additional remote in your own git clone so that you can > pull directly from github, merge, then push directly to git-wip-us. > GitHub will see the merge commit and will automatically close t

Re: Project status

Let me overview the different flows: When you're using Subversion as the master read/write repository, that gets mirrored in git.apache.org, which then gets mirrored to GitHub. To apply a PR from GitHub, you'd generally download it as a patch, apply that patch locally, then svn commit it. There's

Re: Project status

Guten Tag Matt Sicker, am Freitag, 17. März 2017 um 16:25 schrieben Sie: > Since I'm a PMC here, I shouldn't have any issues in the process. > I'll post back on the lists if I need karma to do anything. Sorry, but seems I might be too fast by asking for a migration and I have some questions now:

Re: Project status

Since I'm a PMC here, I shouldn't have any issues in the process. I'll post back on the lists if I need karma to do anything. On 17 March 2017 at 10:24, Ralph Goers wrote: > Thanks Matt. If you know how to do this I would very much appreciate that. > > Ralph > > > On Mar 17, 2017, at 7:09 AM, Ma

Re: Project status

Thanks Matt. If you know how to do this I would very much appreciate that. Ralph > On Mar 17, 2017, at 7:09 AM, Matt Sicker wrote: > > With that in mind, I can help migrate the repos this weekend. > > On 17 March 2017 at 09:08, Matt Sicker > wrote: > We actually have

Re: Project status

With that in mind, I can help migrate the repos this weekend. On 17 March 2017 at 09:08, Matt Sicker wrote: > We actually have to manually migrate to git nowadays. Infra provides help > if necessary, but we can create a new repo via a form, then use git-svn to > import the svn repo, then set the

Re: Project status

We actually have to manually migrate to git nowadays. Infra provides help if necessary, but we can create a new repo via a form, then use git-svn to import the svn repo, then set the remote to the new git repo and push it. Then we can archive the old svn repo. I've been working on doing the same th

Re: Project status

Guten Tag Ralph Goers, am Freitag, 17. März 2017 um 03:56 schrieben Sie: > My personal experience is that you > will get more contributions if you move to git. People seem to > really like being able to fork the project on GitHub and send in > pull requests. I totally agree and Robert Middleton a

Re: Project status

Subversion repos are mirrored on GitHub as well; it's just more work involved merging pull requests via svn unless you're already using git-svn locally (at which point I ask, why even use svn in the first place?) On 16 March 2017 at 21:56, Ralph Goers wrote: > Now that the incubator vote has pas

Re: Project status

Now that the incubator vote has passed we can formally begin the process of moving the project back to Logging Services. Frankly, there isn’t much to do. This list is going to be merged into d...@logging.apache.org along with all the other sub-projects while th

Re: Project status

Guten Tag Roland Uuesoo, am Donnerstag, 2. März 2017 um 13:06 schrieben Sie: > When migrating to GIT, the commit history is retained, there is no > point keeping the old SVN repository. Of course there might be a point, e.g. for people using svn:externals to integrate log4cxx into their project.

Re: Project status

Hi. I think Ralph means that, currently with SVN access, committers can change any project under http://logging.apache.org/ . With GIT, user permissions are based on specific project. For example log4j and log4cxx have different permissions. When migrating to GIT, the commit history is retained

Re: Project status

Guten Tag Ralph Goers, am Mittwoch, 1. März 2017 um 22:18 schrieben Sie: > With git, since each project is a separate repo it is > possible to restrict who can commit to what if that is desired. So current committers to incubating log4cxx are no committers for the umbrella logging project and the

Re: Project status

In SVN each subproject exists under the whole logging umbrella. Any committer to the logging project can commit to any logging subproject. With git, since each project is a separate repo it is possible to restrict who can commit to what if that is desired. The ASF has its own git that is mirrore

Re: Project status

Guten Tag Ralph Goers, am Mittwoch, 1. März 2017 um 18:01 schrieben Sie: > It seems to me the experiment that to reboot log4cxx has not > succeeded. Sad but true. > I would suggest that the svn repo be converted to git so > that the current committers can retain their commit privileges. I don't

Project status

The Logging PMC has been discussing merging all the mailing lists into a single dev list and a single user’s list. As such, this is probably a good time to discuss where log4cxx is headed. It seems to me the experiment that to reboot log4cxx has not succeeded. As such I think the proper course