www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Richard Eckart de Castilho (Jira)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (LEGAL-478) Releases when working with git (gitbox/GitHub)
Date Wed, 04 Sep 2019 19:18:00 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-478?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16922774#comment-16922774

Richard Eckart de Castilho commented on LEGAL-478:

True. I don't think I suggested that they were.

Preparing a release for me involves the steps of
# cloning the repository (git specific)
# checking out a release preparation branch (git specific)
# performing the release processes (e.g. mvn release:prepare release:perform) - this implicitly
creates a tag in git which causes a release to appear on the GitHub page, but this is - as
you say - NOT the release
# staging the release artifacts (to ASF SVN)
# voting on the release
# if vote is successful, moving the artifacts to the actual ASF release spot in SVN
# merge the release branch into master (git specific)
# announcing the release

Now because of the wording in the "old" page regarding pushes and releases having to be "based
off the canonical" repos, we ([~schor] and I) were kind of wondering whether it is mandatory
to create the initial clone  (step 1) from the ASF repo and to make all release-related pushes
also directly to the ASF repo... however, the "new" page doesn't seem to mandate such a process
and cloning from GitHub and pushing to GitHub seems to be perfectly fine here (since changes
are synched bi-directionally anyway).

> Releases when working with git (gitbox/GitHub)
> ----------------------------------------------
>                 Key: LEGAL-478
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-478
>             Project: Legal Discuss
>          Issue Type: Question
>          Components: Policy Question
>            Reporter: Richard Eckart de Castilho
>            Priority: Major
> There is an apparently outdated (it says in its title that it refers to the "experimental
writable git repos" which are no longer experimental) page here
>    http://apache.org/dev/writable-git
> which says that
> * The ASF repo must be the canonical master repo that all committers push changes to.
> * ASF releases must be cut from the canonical ASF Git repositories.
> The current page appears to be https://gitbox.apache.org - and it says
> * This service, gitbox.apache.org, provides Apache projects with a two-master setup of
git repositories, allowing committers to utilize two different avenues of committing code
to the Apache Software Foundation; through GitHub or through the ASF.
> * People that do not wish to utilize GitHub may continue using thier ASF credentials
to push code to gitbox.apache.org - we do not mandate use of one of the other.
> So if the info on https://gitbox.apache.org supersedes the http://apache.org/dev/writable-git,
then I interpret that as:
> * push where you want  (through GitHub or ASF since they are synched)
> * when you release, clone and push also where you want (through GitHub or ASF since they
are synched)
> Is that correct?
> If yes, would it be feasible to remove the outdated page along with the document explaining
why pushes must go through the ASF repo (http://www.sunstarsys.com/essays/git-and-non-repudiation)
to avoid confusion?

This message was sent by Atlassian Jira

To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org

View raw message