Login | Register For Free | Help
Search for: (Advanced)

Mailing List Archive: Zope: Dev

Supporting interworking with repository branches on github

 

 

Zope dev RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded


l at lrowe

Nov 22, 2011, 9:13 AM

Post #1 of 9 (328 views)
Permalink
Supporting interworking with repository branches on github

As you are already aware, at the SF Zope sprint we used Git and github
for our work. The work contained in https://github.com/zopefoundation
is by people who have already signed the Zope Foundation contributor
agreement.

While the Zope Foundation deliberates on version control, I think it's
likely that development will continue using Git and Github. We want to
do this in a way that maintains flexibility for code committed to Git
to also be committed to svn.zope.org, so it would be helpful to get a
list of Name, Email, username for svn.zope.org committers to
facilitate the creation of an author mapping file. (Presumably this
information is in LDAP or similar.)

We would of course be happy to hand administration rights of the
github organization to the Zope Foundation if it was felt to be
helpful in ensuring that contributions to that repository counted
under the committer agreement.

Laurence
_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


charlie.clark at clark-consulting

Nov 22, 2011, 1:10 PM

Post #2 of 9 (303 views)
Permalink
Re: Supporting interworking with repository branches on github [In reply to]

Hi Laurence,

Am 22.11.2011, 18:13 Uhr, schrieb Laurence Rowe <l [at] lrowe>:

> While the Zope Foundation deliberates on version control,

What's this about the Zope Foundation deliberating, why don't you just say
prevaricating?, on version control? I thought Tres presented a cogent
argument for maintaining the status quo and stick with svn.

> I think it's likely that development will continue using Git and Github.

Sounds like a self-fulfilling prophecy. FWIW the STD justification for
something ("everyone else has got syphilis so I want it, too.") is never a
good one.

Enough of the linguistic shilly-shallying. I do think that we need
something like PIPs or PLIPs for Zope 4 (jokingly referred to as ZIPs in
one of my recent posts) to work through some of the suggestions that have
been made.

Charlie
--
Charlie Clark
Managing Director
Clark Consulting & Research
German Office
Kronenstr. 27a
Düsseldorf
D- 40217
Tel: +49-211-600-3657
Mobile: +49-178-782-6226
_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


tseaver at palladion

Nov 22, 2011, 1:46 PM

Post #3 of 9 (307 views)
Permalink
Re: Supporting interworking with repository branches on github [In reply to]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 11/22/2011 12:13 PM, Laurence Rowe wrote:
> As you are already aware, at the SF Zope sprint we used Git and
> github for our work. The work contained in
> https://github.com/zopefoundation is by people who have already signed
> the Zope Foundation contributor agreement.
>
> While the Zope Foundation deliberates on version control, I think
> it's likely that development will continue using Git and Github. We
> want to do this in a way that maintains flexibility for code committed
> to Git to also be committed to svn.zope.org, so it would be helpful to
> get a list of Name, Email, username for svn.zope.org committers to
> facilitate the creation of an author mapping file. (Presumably this
> information is in LDAP or similar.)
>
> We would of course be happy to hand administration rights of the
> github organization to the Zope Foundation if it was felt to be
> helpful in ensuring that contributions to that repository counted
> under the committer agreement.


Please don't try to jump the gun on the process here: you should be
thinking of the existing Github branches as merely "scratchpads" for the
sprint work, which should be merged into the canonical repository when
they are ready. It is not appropriate for a small subset of the
community to preempt this kind of choid: "ask forgiveness rather than
permission" is *not* going to fly here, and trying to push harder only
irritates folks you might otherwise persuade.



Tres.
- --
===================================================================
Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tseaver [at] palladion
Palladion Software "Excellence by Design" http://palladion.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk7MGD8ACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ4XsgCgxMz1AtXcWXrv4EFnPxzhk9a4
qfQAn1DL5LhBqTqrCw6PUXxOCN7tSSX7
=EHmW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


ws at gocept

Nov 22, 2011, 10:58 PM

Post #4 of 9 (300 views)
Permalink
Re: Supporting interworking with repository branches on github [In reply to]

* Tres Seaver <tseaver [at] palladion> [2011-11-22 22:46]:
> On 11/22/2011 12:13 PM, Laurence Rowe wrote:
>> While the Zope Foundation deliberates on version control, I think
>> it's likely that development will continue using Git and Github.
>
> Please don't try to jump the gun on the process here [...]
> It is not appropriate for a small subset of the community to preempt
> this kind of choid: "ask forgiveness rather than permission" is *not*
> going to fly here, and trying to push harder only irritates folks you
> might otherwise persuade.

When reading the emails on this list about this topic, I get a strong
feeling of "us vs. them". Is that really necessary?

In that light, and trying to make visible the (positive!) aspects of the
different opinions, allow me to ask:

Tres, while I realize that you also rightly raise the formal issue that
a vocal minority shouldn't surge ahead and create facts, do I understand
you correctly that the main inherent[1] issue is a legal one, concerning
proper handling of copyright etc.? Could someone explain what's at stake
here, since at least I only have a vague feeling of "if something in
that area goes wrong, it could be really bad"?

Laurence, do I understand you correctly that your main concern is ease
of use for development and that decentralized version control would be
preferable to a centralized one? Do you feel unduly blocked by the need
to resolve these (rather tricky) legal issues? Might a technical
solution be of use until this is resolved (git can read/write svn, can't
it)?

Wolfgang


[1] Sorry, my English is failing me. I'm looking for a word that means,
as opposed to formal.

_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


l at lrowe

Nov 23, 2011, 5:54 AM

Post #5 of 9 (299 views)
Permalink
Re: Supporting interworking with repository branches on github [In reply to]

On 23 November 2011 06:58, Wolfgang Schnerring <ws [at] gocept> wrote:
> * Tres Seaver <tseaver [at] palladion> [2011-11-22 22:46]:
>> On 11/22/2011 12:13 PM, Laurence Rowe wrote:
>>> While the Zope Foundation deliberates on version control, I think
>>> it's likely that development will continue using Git and Github.
>>
>> Please don't try to jump the gun on the process here [...]
>> It is not appropriate for a small subset of the community to preempt
>> this kind of choid: "ask forgiveness rather than permission" is *not*
>> going to fly here, and trying to push harder only irritates folks you
>> might otherwise persuade.
>
> When reading the emails on this list about this topic, I get a strong
> feeling of "us vs. them". Is that really necessary?
>
> In that light, and trying to make visible the (positive!) aspects of the
> different opinions, allow me to ask:
>
> Tres, while I realize that you also rightly raise the formal issue that
> a vocal minority shouldn't surge ahead and create facts, do I understand
> you correctly that the main inherent[1] issue is a legal one, concerning
> proper handling of copyright etc.? Could someone explain what's at stake
> here, since at least I only have a vague feeling of "if something in
> that area goes wrong, it could be really bad"?
>
> Laurence, do I understand you correctly that your main concern is ease
> of use for development and that decentralized version control would be
> preferable to a centralized one? Do you feel unduly blocked by the need
> to resolve these (rather tricky) legal issues? Might a technical
> solution be of use until this is resolved (git can read/write svn, can't
> it)?

Yes, we want to benefit from the ease of merging afforded by git and
be able to use the excellent facilities that github provides.
Unfortunately git-svn is really only a tool for an individual
developer (collaboration still takes place in svn) and does not bring
the benefits that a real git repository does - the ability to
collaborate on github and use the tools provided there. The current
scratch repository is a conversion using svn2git, as that has proper
support for tags.

It's not clear to me what the blocking issues are from the ZF
perspective, whether legal or just that most ZF members don't want to
use git.

Laurence
_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


tseaver at palladion

Nov 23, 2011, 6:50 AM

Post #6 of 9 (297 views)
Permalink
Re: Supporting interworking with repository branches on github [In reply to]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 11/22/2011 05:19 PM, Laurence Rowe wrote:
> On 22 November 2011 21:46, Tres Seaver <tseaver [at] palladion> wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 11/22/2011 12:13 PM, Laurence Rowe wrote:
>>> As you are already aware, at the SF Zope sprint we used Git and
>>> github for our work. The work contained in
>>> https://github.com/zopefoundation is by people who have already
>>> signed the Zope Foundation contributor agreement.
>>>
>>> While the Zope Foundation deliberates on version control, I think
>>> it's likely that development will continue using Git and Github.
>>> We want to do this in a way that maintains flexibility for code
>>> committed to Git to also be committed to svn.zope.org, so it would
>>> be helpful to get a list of Name, Email, username for svn.zope.org
>>> committers to facilitate the creation of an author mapping file.
>>> (Presumably this information is in LDAP or similar.)
>>>
>>> We would of course be happy to hand administration rights of the
>>> github organization to the Zope Foundation if it was felt to be
>>> helpful in ensuring that contributions to that repository counted
>>> under the committer agreement.
>>
>>
>> Please don't try to jump the gun on the process here: you should
>> be thinking of the existing Github branches as merely "scratchpads"
>> for the sprint work, which should be merged into the canonical
>> repository when they are ready. It is not appropriate for a small
>> subset of the community to preempt this kind of choid: "ask
>> forgiveness rather than permission" is *not* going to fly here, and
>> trying to push harder only irritates folks you might otherwise
>> persuade.
>
> I think some indication of a timetable for that process is necessary.


I said earlier that this kind of decision would be best addressed at the
annual meeting of the foundation in Q1 2012. I also indicated that I
didn't think github vs. the SVN status quo was the only possible choice.


> The view of many of those at the sprint was that it would be less
> work to simply fork and develop a custom publisher for Plone.


I imagine that the effort is substantially bigger than you think. I also
don't think that the damage to community goodwill would be negligible here.


> I think there is value to keeping that work under the auspices of the
> Zope Foundation as it may be helpful for other projects currently on
> Zope 2. But realistically, unless the Zope Foundation is interested
> in supporting those developers looking to work on a new project by
> enabling them to use a modern version control system then my view is
> unlikely to prevail.


First, this is not a "new project": the existing github repos contain what
are really a handful of commits across two projects (Zope and
Products.ZCatalog; the ZConfig and Products.PythonScripts repos don't have
any commits). The deltas are very small compared to the installed base,
and could be trivially landed back in SVN today, either on the respective
trunks or on branches.

Second, it is already feasible to work with modern VCSes against the
existing SVN repository: I've been doing it with bzr for literally years
now; I know of lots of documentation on using git against SVN as well. Of
course, Github is more than a VCS, but its main advantage over other
solutions lies in being able to accept casual contributions from non-core
developers, which is hardly in scope for the early phases of the Zope4
effort.

What *is* being "blocked" here is a push by a relatively small group of
committers[1] to impose a unilateral change to a long-established
development culture, without prior consultation, and backed by a
not-very-thinly-veiled threat of a fork.


[1] I count you, rossp, mikko, and garbas as having non-merged branches.


Tres.
- --
===================================================================
Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tseaver [at] palladion
Palladion Software "Excellence by Design" http://palladion.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk7NCEkACgkQ+gerLs4ltQ73uACfY1d309afRKU0K1d4/BTV4Uf7
RS0AnjE6xFQro9pkbH3Yqk7mnOd8FbFk
=t4Eo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


flo at chaoflow

Nov 23, 2011, 4:29 PM

Post #7 of 9 (286 views)
Permalink
Re: Supporting interworking with repository branches on github [In reply to]

On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 09:50:49 -0500, Tres Seaver <tseaver [at] palladion> wrote:
>
> Second, it is already feasible to work with modern VCSes against the
> existing SVN repository: I've been doing it with bzr for literally years
> now; I know of lots of documentation on using git against SVN as well. Of
> course, Github is more than a VCS, but its main advantage over other
> solutions lies in being able to accept casual contributions from non-core
> developers, which is hardly in scope for the early phases of the Zope4
> effort.

github enables a peer review process: while everybody who signed the
plone committer agreement could just commit to the plone repo, we do
pull-requests and somebody else with commit rights checks the request
and merges.

It's not about git locally - I'm doing that for years, too - it's about
git server side.

florian
--
Florian Friesdorf <flo [at] chaoflow>
GPG FPR: 7A13 5EEE 1421 9FC2 108D BAAF 38F8 99A3 0C45 F083
Jabber/XMPP: flo [at] chaoflow
IRC: chaoflow on freenode,ircnet,blafasel,OFTC


wichert at wiggy

Nov 23, 2011, 11:58 PM

Post #8 of 9 (285 views)
Permalink
Re: Supporting interworking with repository branches on github [In reply to]

On 11/24/2011 01:29 AM, Florian Friesdorf wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 09:50:49 -0500, Tres Seaver<tseaver [at] palladion> wrote:
>> Second, it is already feasible to work with modern VCSes against the
>> existing SVN repository: I've been doing it with bzr for literally years
>> now; I know of lots of documentation on using git against SVN as well. Of
>> course, Github is more than a VCS, but its main advantage over other
>> solutions lies in being able to accept casual contributions from non-core
>> developers, which is hardly in scope for the early phases of the Zope4
>> effort.
> github enables a peer review process: while everybody who signed the
> plone committer agreement could just commit to the plone repo, we do
> pull-requests and somebody else with commit rights checks the request
> and merges.

We've never had a problem with peer review before. People review the
commit lists which receive all commits with full diffs and react if they
see something off. That is a very well working peer review system. I
don't see that improving with github; in fact I see it becoming worse:
commit emails no longer get diffs at all, and people are less likely to
look at a webinterface for a quick review than they are to take a quick
look at an email. The move from Plone to github certainly made me stop
all review work, where I reviewed all commits to core code before.

Wichert.
_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )


l at lrowe

Nov 24, 2011, 8:32 AM

Post #9 of 9 (284 views)
Permalink
Re: Supporting interworking with repository branches on github [In reply to]

On 24 November 2011 07:58, Wichert Akkerman <wichert [at] wiggy> wrote:
> On 11/24/2011 01:29 AM, Florian Friesdorf wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 09:50:49 -0500, Tres Seaver<tseaver [at] palladion>  wrote:
>>> Second, it is already feasible to work with modern VCSes against the
>>> existing SVN repository:  I've been doing it with bzr for literally years
>>> now;  I know of lots of documentation on using git against SVN as well. Of
>>> course, Github is more than a VCS, but its main advantage over other
>>> solutions lies in being able to accept casual contributions from non-core
>>> developers, which is hardly in scope for the early phases of the Zope4
>>> effort.
>> github enables a peer review process: while everybody who signed the
>> plone committer agreement could just commit to the plone repo, we do
>> pull-requests and somebody else with commit rights checks the request
>> and merges.
>
> We've never had a problem with peer review before. People review the
> commit lists which receive all commits with full diffs and react if they
> see something off. That is a very well working peer review system. I
> don't see that improving with github; in fact I see it becoming worse:
> commit emails no longer get diffs at all, and people are less likely to
> look at a webinterface for a quick review than they are to take a quick
> look at an email. The move from Plone to github certainly made me stop
> all review work, where I reviewed all commits to core code before.

I'm not sure I agree with that, it's certainly been an issue in CMF
for instance. Where we really miss out is that only a fairly small
group of people feel confident enough to commit their changes, and as
a group we do a poor job of encouraging new contributors as patches
are often left in the bug tracker. I certainly find it much easier to
review a pull request and click merge from the github interface
(leaving it to Jenkins to validate that the tests continue to pass.)
For the long term health of the project this is vital, we're not
replacing the developers we're losing.

It certainly shouldn't be that difficult to produce our own emails
with full changesets for Plone, it just requires someone who misses
them to pick it up.

Laurence
_______________________________________________
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev [at] zope
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
https://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )

Zope dev RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded
 
 


Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads
 
  Web Applications & Managed Hosting Powered by Gossamer Threads Inc.