brooklyn-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Hadrian Zbarcea <hzbar...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [HEADS-UP] Brooklyn graduation
Date Wed, 18 Nov 2015 20:36:15 GMT
Uhm, that's a tricky one. I'll have to follow up on this. My guts 
feeling says that altering history is not something that we want to do, 
but I understand the rationale.

We could abandon the repo (leave it as incubator-brookly, not mirrored 
at GH), I guess, and only copy the stuff we want (with history).

Hadrian

On 11/18/2015 03:22 PM, Richard Downer wrote:
> +1 - that sounds like a good idea. I'd suggest that - at least
> initially - the docs go into this repository.
>
> I'm still not convinced about the versioning - BUT that is a separate
> issue and won't block consensus for splitting the repositories.
>
> Hadrian, any thoughts on the feasibility of editing the history to
> remove the large binary objects? That seems to have to got lost in
> this thread.
>
> Richard.
>
>
>
> On 18 November 2015 at 19:02, Hadrian Zbarcea <hzbarcea@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Do you see apache/brooklyn as being the distro project? If that's the case
>> +1 from me.
>>
>> Hadrian
>>
>>
>> On 11/18/2015 01:59 PM, Alex Heneveld wrote:
>>>
>>> For external relations purposes and as an umbrella should we also have
>>> apache/brooklyn ?
>>>
>>> I tend to think yes.
>>>
>>> Best
>>> Alex
>>> On 18 Nov 2015 17:55, "Hadrian Zbarcea" <hzbarcea@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> So I see a lot of consensus on Alex's proposal with the following
>>>> amendment (s/brooklyn/brooklyn-core/):
>>>> * apache/brooklyn-core
>>>> * apache/brooklyn-ui
>>>> * apache/brooklyn-library
>>>>
>>>> If we can get a consensus on this I don't think we need to go to a vote.
>>>> I
>>>> will address the other comments as direct replies, because I don't see
>>>> them
>>>> as contradictory to this proposal.
>>>>
>>>> WDYT?
>>>> Hadrian
>>>>
>>>> On 11/17/2015 12:44 PM, Alex Heneveld wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> +1 to removing the large artifacts; it's just stupid having them there.
>>>>>
>>>>> Personally I would like to see the apache/incubator-brooklyn carved up
>>>>> as follows:
>>>>>
>>>>> * apache/brooklyn
>>>>> * apache/brooklyn-ui
>>>>> * apache/brooklyn-library
>>>>>
>>>>> The third one contains all the concrete items, like jboss and tomcat
and
>>>>> cassandra etc.  The UI is the jsgui.
>>>>>
>>>>> The first one is the main one, with everything else, including CLI and
>>>>> REST API, vanilla software process, and jclouds locations and osgi.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The only other thing I'm wondering is whether brooklyn-api should be
>>>>> separate, and very rarely changing.  This would allow us potentially
to
>>>>> run different versions of brooklyn-* in the same system, using the magic
>>>>> of OSGi.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> WDYT?
>>>>>
>>>>> Best
>>>>> Alex
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 17/11/2015 17:03, Richard Downer wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Hadrian,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't think there's any need to split the repository (although
I've
>>>>>> no strong opinions on this, if someone else has an idea).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However there has been a long-standing issue with our repository's
>>>>>> history - in the dim and distant past, binary artifacts of Tomcat
etc.
>>>>>> used for testing were committed to the repository. These are long
>>>>>> gone, but they still exist in the git history, and everybody is forced
>>>>>> to clone these large artifacts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Could we use the graduation migration as an opportunity to rewrite
the
>>>>>> git history to permanently remove these large artifacts? It'd result
>>>>>> in a much quicker clone of the repo for new contributors to Brooklyn.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Richard.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 17 November 2015 at 00:58, Hadrian Zbarcea <hzbarcea@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hello Brooklyners,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The Brooklyn graduation resolution is again on the board agenda.
This
>>>>>>> time I
>>>>>>> paid paranoid attention to details and I hope the stars to be
better
>>>>>>> aligned.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Assuming all goes well, there will be a few tasks to take care
post
>>>>>>> graduation, mostly related to dropping the "incubating" suffix.
Part
>>>>>>> of that
>>>>>>> process it is possible to split the git repository into multiple
>>>>>>> smaller
>>>>>>> ones. It is possible to do it later, but doing it now would be
easier
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> more natural, I think.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Therefore, if anybody has any idea or proposal related to that,
speak
>>>>>>> up
>>>>>>> now. In the absence of consensus the status quo will be maintained.
I
>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>> work with infra and try to make the process as smooth as possible
for
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> community regardless of which way we decide to go.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> Hadrian
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>

Mime
View raw message