flink-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] GitBox
Date Tue, 18 Jul 2017 12:45:18 GMT
According to the JIRA you linked, you can push the the apache repo, but 
it will be overridden by GitHub.
(as it should since the GitHub repo is the original)

The solution offered in the JIRA is to (force) push to the github repo 
instead of the apache one.
Unless I'm misunderstanding this doesn't appear to change anything.

On 18.07.2017 14:37, Greg Hogan wrote:
> You are not able to push to the ASF repo? This link implies that both work (and identify
an issue now addressed):
>    https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14039 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-14039>
>
>  From my .git/config:
>
> [remote "origin"]
> 	url = git@github.com:apache/flink-shaded.git
> 	fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/*
> [remote "apache"]
> 	url = https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/flink-shaded.git
> 	fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/apache/*
> [branch "master"]
> 	remote = origin
> 	merge = refs/heads/master
>
>
>> On Jul 18, 2017, at 7:52 AM, Chesnay Schepler <chesnay@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> So committers would still need to link their accounts.
>>
>> Source for the mirror info: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-13926
>>
>> On 18.07.2017 13:50, Chesnay Schepler wrote:
>>> Alright, so there is an apache repo that can found at https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=flink-shaded.git
>>> but it is a mirror of the github repo.
>>>
>>> For flink, we push to apache and it is mirrored to github.
>>> For flink-shaded, we push to github and it is mirror to apache.
>>>
>>> On 18.07.2017 13:47, Chesnay Schepler wrote:
>>>> I'm not aware of any asf hosted repository for gitbox projects; if you look
at the flink-shaded repository you will
>>>> not see any mention of it being a mirror, compared to the flink repo.
>>>>
>>>> The git-wip-us.apache.org repo for flink-shaded was removed when we switched.
>>>>
>>>> On 18.07.2017 13:27, Greg Hogan wrote:
>>>>> Linking is required to commit to the ASF hosted repo as well as the GitHub
repo? My understanding was that linking and 2FA was only required to commit through GitHub,
so no one would have diminished capabilities. I’d generally recommend only ever writing
to a single repo to prevent concurrent commits.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Jul 18, 2017, at 6:21 AM, Chesnay Schepler <chesnay@apache.org>
wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We recently moved flink-shaded to GitBox; overall I'm quite happy
with how it works.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However, it is not possible for committers to push commits that haven't
gone through the github/asf
>>>>>> account linking process (https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I verified this today in an experiment with the help of Robert.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The linking process requires every committer to join the ASF github
organization, include their github username
>>>>>> in the apache profile, and setup 2-factor-authorization for their
github account.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> While i would love to have the gitbox functionality for the Flink
repository I don't know whether we want to
>>>>>> impose these requirements on all committers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 21.06.2017 19:49, Robert Metzger wrote:
>>>>>>> +1 for trying out Gitbox!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 6:50 PM, Greg Hogan <code@greghogan.com>
wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> My understanding is that with GitBox project committers who
have linked
>>>>>>>> Apache and GitHub accounts are given organization write permissions.
Other
>>>>>>>> contributors will continue to have read permissions.
>>>>>>>> https://help.github.com/articles/repository-permission-levels-for-an-
>>>>>>>> organization/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The last comment noting the “split-brain” shouldn’t
preclude the use of
>>>>>>>> GitBox but we should come to a general consensus before switching
to commit
>>>>>>>> into the GitHub repo.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If we want to try GitHub for flink-web, a second step could
to switch and
>>>>>>>> use with the nascent flink-libraries.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Jun 18, 2017, at 6:50 AM, Chesnay Schepler <chesnay@apache.org>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Found some info in this JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/
>>>>>>>> jira/browse/INFRA-14191
>>>>>>>>> Apparently, Gitbox is still in the beta phase. There
are no public docs
>>>>>>>> for it yet.
>>>>>>>>> Committers are required to link their apache & GitHub
accounts, which
>>>>>>>> requires 2FA on GitHub.
>>>>>>>>> As it stands I would be in favor of Gregs original suggestion
of
>>>>>>>> activating it for flink-web as a test bed.
>>>>>>>>> I would wait with the main repo until we actually have
more info and it
>>>>>>>> is a bit more proven.
>>>>>>>>> On 11.06.2017 19:37, Ufuk Celebi wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I would also like to see this happening for both
flink-web and flink
>>>>>>>>>> if it allows committers to have control over the
respective repos.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 4:05 PM, Chesnay Schepler
<chesnay@apache.org>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> What are the downsides of this? Actually, is
there any ASF resource
>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>> outlines what this would enable?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In one of the threads i saw said that this would
also allow committers
>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>> close PR's, assign labels and such.
>>>>>>>>>>> This sounds very interesting to me for the main
repo actually.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 09.06.2017 17:41, Greg Hogan wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Robert has an open PR from March. I’ve
found, for example, PRs adding
>>>>>>>>>>>> links to talks or slides left open for months.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I’d suggest Fluo is to Accumulo as flink-web
is to the flink repo, and
>>>>>>>>>>>> that migration looks to be satisfactory.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 9, 2017, at 11:15 AM, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> bq. better track the oft-neglected contributions
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Do you have estimate on how many contributions
were not paid
>>>>>>>> attention in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the current infrastructure.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Looking at #2, it seems Accumulo community
hasn't reached consensus
>>>>>>>> yet.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 7:54 AM, Greg
Hogan <code@greghogan.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ASF now has available (and maybe
mandatory for new projects or
>>>>>>>> repos)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GitBox [0] which enables bi-directional
sync to GitHub and links
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> committers' accounts, allowing for
greater use of GitHub
>>>>>>>> functionality
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contributors and for committers to
perform many tasks otherwise
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> requiring
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> INFRA tickets.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to propose moving flink-web
[1] to GitBox, using GitHub
>>>>>>>> issues,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and enabling notifications to the
mailing lists. Apache Accumulo has
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> recently discussed [2] this topic
with a list of benefits after
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> migrating
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fluo. By migrating flink-web we can
better track the oft-neglected
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> contributions and also test the waters
for future migrations
>>>>>>>> (perhaps
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the future sub-projects).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [0] https://gitbox.apache.org/
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/flink-web/pulls
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [2]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://apache-accumulo.1065345.n5.nabble.com/DISCUSS-
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> GitBox-tp21160p21497.html
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Greg
>>>
>


Mime
View raw message