airavata-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Amila Jayasekara <thejaka.am...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Commit messages, Jira, and version control
Date Wed, 22 Jan 2014 10:14:49 GMT
Hi Shameera,

Some comments inline.

On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 11:53 PM, Shameera Rathnayaka <
shameerainfo@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I just needed to take attention for git repository structure before we go
> with same structure that we have with SVN. It is always good to understand
> what are the options we have and what is best suite for Airavata. This is a
> good place to change the structure of project if it is required.
>

You are correct. I agree this is a good time to think about module
structure and a good time to change if we want.



> Therefore I would like to suggest that we need to rethink of our module
> structure, IMO we are too fine grain here. As an example under the rest
> module we have another four sub modules( can't we merge client and mapping
> modules? ) and for thrift we have two top modules can't we go with one?
> Please correct me if i am wrong ?
>

I am not sure about thrift, but I kind of like how we have organized rest
module right now. IMO I dont think it is too fine grained. I think we have
correct modularity. According to my experience so far it is easy for me to
work with the module structure (for REST) we have right now. But others may
have different view points.


>
> 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. 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.

It is certainly good to think about these now. Thanks for bringing this
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/
>

Mime
View raw message