airavata-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Danushka Menikkumbura <danushka.menikkumb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Commit messages, Jira, and version control
Date Wed, 22 Jan 2014 18:10:02 GMT
+1.

There are more important aspects of Git that makes it appealing.
Restructuring the code base is a completely different exercise where using
Git repositories for different modules is just part of it.


On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 9:12 PM, Marlon Pierce <marpierc@iu.edu> wrote:

> My thinking is that we should go slowly and get through the git
> migration first before reorganizing the code base. The code
> reorganization needs more discussion and will have some non-trivial
> consequences discussed below.
>
>
>
> Marlon
>
> On 1/22/14 10:09 AM, Amila Jayasekara wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 6:44 AM, Shameera Rathnayaka <
> shameerainfo@gmail.com
> >> wrote:
> >> Hi Amila,
> >>
> >> see my comment inline,
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 3:44 PM, Amila Jayasekara <
> thejaka.amila@gmail.com
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> Isn't it good to use separate repository to XBaya? My point is, Then
> we
> >>>> can introduce another GUI client( Web base) and deprecate XBaya in
> future.
> >>>>
> >>> I do not think it is good to have XBaya in a separate repo. There are
> lot
> >>> of common code which XBaya and other artefacts share.
> >>>
> >> IMO as a GUI client, Xbaya only depend on Airavata client api? If not
> >> isn't it better to do this separation? As a result we will end up
> getting
> >> rich client API. WDYT?
> >>
> > There are common code like utils, configurations that both XBaya and
> other
> > artefacts depends on.
> > Again 2 repos mean more work. 2 build servers, 2 release cycles and more
> > dependencies. And so far we didnt encounter issues managing Airavata code
> > using a single repo. Maybe we can consider this when we really face
> issues
> > with a single repo.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Amila
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>> So it is bit tricky how to separate these artefacts into 2 separate
> >>> repos. Also incase if we find a blocker in common code we anyhow have
> to
> >>> release both repositories. So in long term it will be a hassle to
> maintain
> >>> 2 repos. Again Airavata is not a huge code base, therefore working
> with a
> >>> single repository will be easy IMO.
> >>>
> >> Yes i agree with you, if the code base it not huge it is always good to
> >> keep all in one repository. the rational behind above suggestion is ,
> >> Airavata will have multiple GUI clients( XBaya, Web base GUI , etc ...
> ) in
> >> future. IMO server side developer will not works on GUI client code
> >> frequently. But first of all we need to decouple XBaya from server code.
> >>
> >>
> >>> It is certainly good to think about these now. Thanks for bringing this
> >>> Shameera.
> >>>
> >> you are welcome Amila :).
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Shameera.
> >>
> >>> Regards
> >>> Thejaka Amila
> >>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> Shameera.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Suresh Marru <smarru@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Actually I responded pre-maturely. I am myself not convinced if
this
> >>>>> will help or is needed. Let me withdraw my suggestion and stick
to an
> >>>>> opinion (for now) to have a single unified repo. We may want to
once
> >>>>> revisit the layout as we get close to 1.0.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Suresh
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Jan 21, 2014, at 9:46 PM, Amila Jayasekara <
> thejaka.amila@gmail.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi Suresh,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I didnt quite understand what you proposed. Are you proposing
to
> have
> >>>>> separate repos for "Airavata Services", "Airavata Client SDK’s"
etc
> ... ?
> >>>>>> If so I am with Danushka.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Also Airavata is a fairly manageable code base. So I also dont
see
> an
> >>>>> advantage having separate repos for each of the sub-components.
> >>>>>> Thanks
> >>>>>> Amila
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Danushka Menikkumbura <
> >>>>> danushka.menikkumbura@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> Suresh,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> IMO, having independent repositories does not really help unless
the
> >>>>> components are mutually exclusive and we ship them independently.
> >>>>>> Danushka
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 1:32 AM, Suresh Marru <smarru@apache.org>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>> In retrospect, it may be better to make this decision now and
have
> >>>>> INFRA create the required repositories at once.
> >>>>>> I kind of liked what Shameera started, just to rephrase:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> * Airavata Services
> >>>>>> * Airavata Client SDK’s
> >>>>>> * Airavata Web UI’s
> >>>>>> * Airavata GUI Tools
> >>>>>> * Airavata Admin Tools
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I am + 0 on this. Not sure if breaking up will reduce clutter
and
> >>>>> provide better manageability or will overwhelm.
> >>>>>> Here are some examples, if it helps:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> https://github.com/jclouds
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> And the master ASF repo which is an umbrella for all apache
project
> >>>>> mirrors - https://github.com/apache
> >>>>>> Suresh
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Jan 21, 2014, at 2:36 PM, Marlon Pierce <marpierc@iu.edu>
wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> For now, I want to keep the same structure with one repository.
> >>>>> Assuming
> >>>>>>> the vote passes, this will be a simple email to Apache INFRA
to do
> >>>>> the
> >>>>>>> conversion.  We can bring up reorganization separately.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Please let me know if I am missing something, though.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Marlon
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On 1/21/14 2:28 PM, Shameera Rathnayaka wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Hi Marlon,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> do we have any idea about the git repository structure
we will
> >>>>> use? all
> >>>>>>>> Airavata code will go under one git repository or we
will have
> >>>>> separate
> >>>>>>>> repository to airavata client , airvata server and xBaya?
(can be
> >>>>> fine
> >>>>>>>> grain further if needed).
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>>> Shameera.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Marlon Pierce <marpierc@iu.edu>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Since this will effect everyone, I will start a
72 hour voting
> >>>>> period
> >>>>>>>>> and discussion thread.  Please vote only on the
[VOTE] thread so
> >>>>> that it
> >>>>>>>>> will be easy to count.  All opinions are welcome.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Marlon
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On 1/16/14 10:51 PM, Amila Jayasekara wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> +1 to move to Git.
> >>>>>>>>>> It seems it is easy for people to contribute
with GIT.
> (Specially
> >>>>>>>>>> situations like GSOC).
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks
> >>>>>>>>>> Thejaka Amila
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Suresh Marru
<
> smarru@apache.org>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Marlon for resurrecting this discussion.
Its also timely
> >>>>> to the
> >>>>>>>>>>> transition before GSOC 14 and as we move
towards Airavata 1.0.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> One thing we have noticed is INFRA support
for GIT transition
> >>>>> has
> >>>>>>>>>>> increased over time. Also, the integration
with GITHUB, jClouds
> >>>>> has
> >>>>>>>>> fully
> >>>>>>>>>>> exploited this and now there may be other
projects also. So all
> >>>>> in all
> >>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>> timing is very good and + 1 to move foreword
for Airavata.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Suresh
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Jan 16, 2014, at 2:50 PM, Marlon Pierce
<marpierc@iu.edu>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi all--
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> We have discussed $subject before for
other reasons without
> >>>>> much action
> >>>>>>>>>>>> [0], so I want to bring it up again.
 Unless the situation has
> >>>>> changed
> >>>>>>>>>>>> recently, Apache's Jira no longer links
SVN commit messages to
> >>>>> Jira
> >>>>>>>>>>>> tickets.  For background on the issues
with SVN, see [1].
> >>>>>  This ticket
> >>>>>>>>>>>> is still unresolved.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> The general linking of repo commits
to Jira tickets through
> >>>>> commit
> >>>>>>>>>>>> comments [2] is a good and virtuous
thing.  We have lost this
> >>>>> in
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Airavata and need to get it back.  This
requires moving to Git
> >>>>> [3] [4].
> >>>>>>>>>>>> What other consequences are there for
doing this?  Let's
> please
> >>>>>>>>>>>> discuss.  It will take a bit of time
from INFRA to make the
> >>>>> conversion,
> >>>>>>>>>>>> but this doesn't seem to be awful. 
We need to preserve
> >>>>> history if we
> >>>>>>>>> do
> >>>>>>>>>>>> this.  What else?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks--
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Marlon
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> [0]
> >>>>> https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@airavata.apache.org/msg03881.html
> >>>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://ecosystem.atlassian.net/browse/SVN-385
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> [2] http://www.apache.org/dev/svngit2jira.html
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> [3] https://git-wip-us.apache.org/
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> [4]
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20INFRA%20AND%20text%20~%20%22git%20svn%22
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Best Regards,
> >>>> Shameera Rathnayaka.
> >>>>
> >>>> email: shameera AT apache.org , shameerainfo AT gmail.com
> >>>> Blog : http://shameerarathnayaka.blogspot.com/
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Best Regards,
> >> Shameera Rathnayaka.
> >>
> >> email: shameera AT apache.org , shameerainfo AT gmail.com
> >> Blog : http://shameerarathnayaka.blogspot.com/
> >>
>
>

Mime
View raw message