[DISCUSS] Codehaus EOL and MOJO migration

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
73 messages Options
1234
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[DISCUSS] Codehaus EOL and MOJO migration

Baptiste MATHUS-3
Hi all,

Might be old news to you, but I guess some may not be aware of that news yet:
Codehaus is coming to EOL...

And it doesn't seem like it's considered to be taken over by other staff members if I read correctly the article (IIUC, this means you cannot even apply to help).

So the question is, where do you thin the MOJO project go? And how to do we handle the migration?

To sum up quickly, we use:
* SCM : SVN (which would make github a hard choice for migration)
* JIRA? Ask atlassian for a JIRA SaaS? https://www.atlassian.com/opensource/overview

WDYT?

-- 
Baptiste
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Codehaus EOL and MOJO migration

David Karlsen-3
Codehaus.org does not respond  - already EOL? ;)
The choises seem sane - except for sticking with svn.
git svn and pointing to the correct places for tags and branches should make it possible to convert each module into a git repo (and use github for hosting).

2015-02-27 10:24 GMT+01:00 Baptiste Mathus <[hidden email]>:
Hi all,

Might be old news to you, but I guess some may not be aware of that news yet:
Codehaus is coming to EOL...

And it doesn't seem like it's considered to be taken over by other staff members if I read correctly the article (IIUC, this means you cannot even apply to help).

So the question is, where do you thin the MOJO project go? And how to do we handle the migration?

To sum up quickly, we use:
* SCM : SVN (which would make github a hard choice for migration)
* JIRA? Ask atlassian for a JIRA SaaS? https://www.atlassian.com/opensource/overview

WDYT?

-- 
Baptiste



--
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Codehaus EOL and MOJO migration

Anders Hammar
Hmmm. Is it only me that sees a problem with the org.codehaus.mojo groupId? Can we continue to use that in the future when syncing to central?
 
Other than that I guess this is a good time to migrate to git instead of svn.
 
/Anders

On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 10:38 AM, David Karlsen <[hidden email]> wrote:
Codehaus.org does not respond  - already EOL? ;)
The choises seem sane - except for sticking with svn.
git svn and pointing to the correct places for tags and branches should make it possible to convert each module into a git repo (and use github for hosting).

2015-02-27 10:24 GMT+01:00 Baptiste Mathus <[hidden email]>:
Hi all,

Might be old news to you, but I guess some may not be aware of that news yet:
Codehaus is coming to EOL...

And it doesn't seem like it's considered to be taken over by other staff members if I read correctly the article (IIUC, this means you cannot even apply to help).

So the question is, where do you thin the MOJO project go? And how to do we handle the migration?

To sum up quickly, we use:
* SCM : SVN (which would make github a hard choice for migration)
* JIRA? Ask atlassian for a JIRA SaaS? https://www.atlassian.com/opensource/overview

WDYT?

-- 
Baptiste



--

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Codehaus EOL and MOJO migration

Aleksei Valikov
Hi,

GitHub is a very good platform. I've moved my projects from self-hosted Confluence/JIRA to GitHub completely. Extremely happy with the move.

* SCM - move to GIT, why stay with SVN? You can move old SVNs to GIT with GitHub mover quite nicely.
* JIRA - I currently even prefer GitHub's issue tracker over JIRA for being lightway and easy-to-use. JIRA grew a monster last years. I personally don't need that much power for my OS projects.
* CI - talk to Travis CI.

Best wishes,
Alexey

On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 10:50 AM, Anders Hammar <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hmmm. Is it only me that sees a problem with the org.codehaus.mojo groupId? Can we continue to use that in the future when syncing to central?
 
Other than that I guess this is a good time to migrate to git instead of svn.
 
/Anders

On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 10:38 AM, David Karlsen <[hidden email]> wrote:
Codehaus.org does not respond  - already EOL? ;)
The choises seem sane - except for sticking with svn.
git svn and pointing to the correct places for tags and branches should make it possible to convert each module into a git repo (and use github for hosting).

2015-02-27 10:24 GMT+01:00 Baptiste Mathus <[hidden email]>:
Hi all,

Might be old news to you, but I guess some may not be aware of that news yet:
Codehaus is coming to EOL...

And it doesn't seem like it's considered to be taken over by other staff members if I read correctly the article (IIUC, this means you cannot even apply to help).

So the question is, where do you thin the MOJO project go? And how to do we handle the migration?

To sum up quickly, we use:
* SCM : SVN (which would make github a hard choice for migration)
* JIRA? Ask atlassian for a JIRA SaaS? https://www.atlassian.com/opensource/overview

WDYT?

-- 
Baptiste



--


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Codehaus EOL and MOJO migration

Baptiste MATHUS-3
In reply to this post by Anders Hammar
Good point Anders, that's indeed something we want to double-check with Codehaus people (btw, who else than Ben, is there anyone else?)

2015-02-27 10:50 GMT+01:00 Anders Hammar <[hidden email]>:
Hmmm. Is it only me that sees a problem with the org.codehaus.mojo groupId? Can we continue to use that in the future when syncing to central?
 
Other than that I guess this is a good time to migrate to git instead of svn.
 
/Anders

On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 10:38 AM, David Karlsen <[hidden email]> wrote:
Codehaus.org does not respond  - already EOL? ;)
The choises seem sane - except for sticking with svn.
git svn and pointing to the correct places for tags and branches should make it possible to convert each module into a git repo (and use github for hosting).

2015-02-27 10:24 GMT+01:00 Baptiste Mathus <[hidden email]>:
Hi all,

Might be old news to you, but I guess some may not be aware of that news yet:
Codehaus is coming to EOL...

And it doesn't seem like it's considered to be taken over by other staff members if I read correctly the article (IIUC, this means you cannot even apply to help).

So the question is, where do you thin the MOJO project go? And how to do we handle the migration?

To sum up quickly, we use:
* SCM : SVN (which would make github a hard choice for migration)
* JIRA? Ask atlassian for a JIRA SaaS? https://www.atlassian.com/opensource/overview

WDYT?

-- 
Baptiste



--




--
Baptiste <Batmat> MATHUS - http://batmat.net
Sauvez un arbre,
Mangez un castor !
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Codehaus EOL and MOJO migration

Arnaud Héritier-2
We can ask to Ben (and sonatype/central) but I'm almost sure he'll have nothing to let us use org.codehaus.* for existing projects.
The question may be for future new plugins. Maybe we should reserve a new groupId and update maven to look at this groupId in addition of org.apache.maven.plugins and org.codehaus.mojo

About sources, I think it was already discussed to move everything to git thus it's just a time constraint to do it now
For the target hosting github will be fine. I think we already reserved an organization (or two :-)

We'll just have to clone repos there when they'll be available in RO on https://github.com/codehaus/
I'm not sure if Ben needs some helps for that

About the issue tracker we may ask if we could have a Cloud hosting but it is limited to 1000 accounts and I'm not sure how many accounts in Codehaus Jira instance are related to mojo projects
Otherwise we can move it to GitHub issues but we'll loose some content (it may be the opportunity to do some cleanup)

About CI and automations ... Cloudbees, TravisCI .... We may ask/test

About web sites .... GitHub sites ?

About Confluence ... Trash ? GitHub Wikis ?

About mailing lists ... Google Groups ??

Do I forget something ?





On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Baptiste Mathus <[hidden email]> wrote:
Good point Anders, that's indeed something we want to double-check with Codehaus people (btw, who else than Ben, is there anyone else?)

2015-02-27 10:50 GMT+01:00 Anders Hammar <[hidden email]>:
Hmmm. Is it only me that sees a problem with the org.codehaus.mojo groupId? Can we continue to use that in the future when syncing to central?
 
Other than that I guess this is a good time to migrate to git instead of svn.
 
/Anders

On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 10:38 AM, David Karlsen <[hidden email]> wrote:
Codehaus.org does not respond  - already EOL? ;)
The choises seem sane - except for sticking with svn.
git svn and pointing to the correct places for tags and branches should make it possible to convert each module into a git repo (and use github for hosting).

2015-02-27 10:24 GMT+01:00 Baptiste Mathus <[hidden email]>:
Hi all,

Might be old news to you, but I guess some may not be aware of that news yet:
Codehaus is coming to EOL...

And it doesn't seem like it's considered to be taken over by other staff members if I read correctly the article (IIUC, this means you cannot even apply to help).

So the question is, where do you thin the MOJO project go? And how to do we handle the migration?

To sum up quickly, we use:
* SCM : SVN (which would make github a hard choice for migration)
* JIRA? Ask atlassian for a JIRA SaaS? https://www.atlassian.com/opensource/overview

WDYT?

-- 
Baptiste



--




--
Baptiste <Batmat> MATHUS - http://batmat.net
Sauvez un arbre,
Mangez un castor !

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Codehaus EOL and MOJO migration

Lennart Jörelid-2
I second the opinions for moving to GitHub (or Bitbucket) instead of remaining in SVN.
If doing so, I suggest we reuse as much as possible of the GitHub infrastructure - Wiki, Issue Tracker, Mailing lists etc.
If we are already bound for some major migrations, let's make the best of them - and a Distributed version control system is a productivity boost.

Also - is there really a point to maintain a particular GroupID (i.e. org.codehaus).
I belive we could/should move Mojo's development efforts into the Apache umbrella (why have 2 sources of normative plugins - apache and codehaus) to simplify for users.


2015-02-27 11:37 GMT+01:00 Arnaud Héritier <[hidden email]>:
We can ask to Ben (and sonatype/central) but I'm almost sure he'll have nothing to let us use org.codehaus.* for existing projects.
The question may be for future new plugins. Maybe we should reserve a new groupId and update maven to look at this groupId in addition of org.apache.maven.plugins and org.codehaus.mojo

About sources, I think it was already discussed to move everything to git thus it's just a time constraint to do it now
For the target hosting github will be fine. I think we already reserved an organization (or two :-)

We'll just have to clone repos there when they'll be available in RO on https://github.com/codehaus/
I'm not sure if Ben needs some helps for that

About the issue tracker we may ask if we could have a Cloud hosting but it is limited to 1000 accounts and I'm not sure how many accounts in Codehaus Jira instance are related to mojo projects
Otherwise we can move it to GitHub issues but we'll loose some content (it may be the opportunity to do some cleanup)

About CI and automations ... Cloudbees, TravisCI .... We may ask/test

About web sites .... GitHub sites ?

About Confluence ... Trash ? GitHub Wikis ?

About mailing lists ... Google Groups ??

Do I forget something ?





On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Baptiste Mathus <[hidden email]> wrote:
Good point Anders, that's indeed something we want to double-check with Codehaus people (btw, who else than Ben, is there anyone else?)

2015-02-27 10:50 GMT+01:00 Anders Hammar <[hidden email]>:
Hmmm. Is it only me that sees a problem with the org.codehaus.mojo groupId? Can we continue to use that in the future when syncing to central?
 
Other than that I guess this is a good time to migrate to git instead of svn.
 
/Anders

On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 10:38 AM, David Karlsen <[hidden email]> wrote:
Codehaus.org does not respond  - already EOL? ;)
The choises seem sane - except for sticking with svn.
git svn and pointing to the correct places for tags and branches should make it possible to convert each module into a git repo (and use github for hosting).

2015-02-27 10:24 GMT+01:00 Baptiste Mathus <[hidden email]>:
Hi all,

Might be old news to you, but I guess some may not be aware of that news yet:
Codehaus is coming to EOL...

And it doesn't seem like it's considered to be taken over by other staff members if I read correctly the article (IIUC, this means you cannot even apply to help).

So the question is, where do you thin the MOJO project go? And how to do we handle the migration?

To sum up quickly, we use:
* SCM : SVN (which would make github a hard choice for migration)
* JIRA? Ask atlassian for a JIRA SaaS? https://www.atlassian.com/opensource/overview

WDYT?

-- 
Baptiste



--




--
Baptiste <Batmat> MATHUS - http://batmat.net
Sauvez un arbre,
Mangez un castor !




--
--
+==============================+
| Bästa hälsningar,
| [sw. "Best regards"]
|
| Lennart Jörelid
| EAI Architect & Integrator
|
| jGuru Europe AB
| Mölnlycke - Kista
|
| Email: [hidden email]
| URL:   www.jguru.se
| Phone
| (skype):    jgurueurope
| (intl):     +46 708 507 603
| (domestic): 0708 - 507 603
+==============================+
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Codehaus EOL and MOJO migration

Baptiste MATHUS-3
In reply to this post by Arnaud Héritier-2


2015-02-27 11:37 GMT+01:00 Arnaud Héritier <[hidden email]>:
We can ask to Ben (and sonatype/central) but I'm almost sure he'll have nothing to let us use org.codehaus.* for existing projects.
The question may be for future new plugins. Maybe we should reserve a new groupId and update maven to look at this groupId in addition of org.apache.maven.plugins and org.codehaus.mojo

About sources, I think it was already discussed to move everything to git thus it's just a time constraint to do it now


Already discussed [1], I was at least once the one sending the associated mail, but the conclusion, though I didn't send a summary VOTE mail since the answers clearly did show that the majority of people were 0 or -1.
That's why I put SCM: SVN in the first place. Because though I'm personnaly inclined to use Git everywhere, I considered the MOJO developers as a whole was still more currently tied to svn. Though the new context might make people reconsider their opinion, granted.


For the target hosting github will be fine. I think we already reserved an organization (or two :-)

We'll just have to clone repos there when they'll be available in RO on https://github.com/codehaus/
I'm not sure if Ben needs some helps for that

Apart from some very rare cases, we almost don't have Git repos currently. Is Ben planning to to expose some converted repo? Not sure that would work correctly with regards to tags, branches, etc. The mojo svn repo is quite big and I guess we'd need to do many specific things to migrate it over to a whole lot of smaller Git repositories. 
 

About the issue tracker we may ask if we could have a Cloud hosting but it is limited to 1000 accounts and I'm not sure how many accounts in Codehaus Jira instance are related to mojo projects
Otherwise we can move it to GitHub issues but we'll loose some content (it may be the opportunity to do some cleanup)

Yeah. I'm not sure GH issues would be sufficient. I guess we don't want to lose the MOJO project to be seen as a whole. For example, for Jenkins (as I know you know Arnaud), JIRA is used because it also offers many features unavailable in GH issues (though we may want to precisely list things we need to check if GH issue could indeed be enough).


About CI and automations ... Cloudbees, TravisCI .... We may ask/test

About web sites .... GitHub sites ?

If GH, then yes, I suppose so. Maybe with a DNS record and the GH trick so that we can have maven-mojo.org or maven-mojo.io or something as the publicly-known URL.


About Confluence ... Trash ? GitHub Wikis ?

Do we even have pages on Confluence for the MOJO project? I thought everything was on mojo.codehaus.org

About mailing lists ... Google Groups ??

Might be, yes.
 

Do I forget something ?


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re[2]: [mojo-dev] [DISCUSS] Codehaus EOL and MOJO migration

Sergei Ivanov
In reply to this post by Lennart Jörelid-2
Hi,

I should say, if Codehaus is no more, GitHub would be my obvious first choice of an alternative platform.

1. Version control.
SVN is a dinosaur and a major impediment for contributing and integrating patches. Git provides a much more streamlined workflow from both committer's and contributor's point of view. I used GitHub for importing legacy SVN repos and it worked flawlessly. We never looked back to SVN. In short, let us ditch SVN completely and use this opportunity to migrate to git.

2. Maven web sites.
It is possible to deploy them to GitHub pages for each project. Works a treat, and there is a GitHub maven site plugin to automate the process.

3. Issue tracking.
Use GitHub issue tracking system. It is integrated with pull requests and commits, it is fast and lightweight, it has got milestones and it should cover all needs of a typical project.
I for one will not miss Jira/FishEye/Cricible bundle, because Atlassian products have become a complete sh*t show in the last few years. For the same reason, I have major reservations against BitBucket.
The only outstanding question is whether there is a way to somehow import the existing Jira content into GitHub. If that is not possible or straightforward, then there is a need to find Jira hosting solution elsewhere, at least for the historic content.

4. Code reviews
See above: GitHub has a great support for reviewing the incoming pull requests.

5. Collaboration
GitHub wikis cover that. Again, the question remains whether it is possible to import the existing content there. However, this may be a much lesser problem, because I reckon most of the content is deployed as part of maven sites, and the rest can be imported manually. At the same time, old irrelevant content could be dropped.

6. Continuous Integration
This is one of the services that is not part of GitHub platform. Travis CI might pretty well cover that, and there are other solutions that are free for OSS projects.

7. Binary artifacts
Most of the artifacts go into maven central, anything that does not fit there, could be hosted at Bintray.

Not sure what else Codehaus provides that is not covered by the above.

Kind regards,
--
Sergei


Friday, 27 February 2015 11:51 +0000 from Lennart Jörelid <[hidden email]>:
I second the opinions for moving to GitHub (or Bitbucket) instead of remaining in SVN.
If doing so, I suggest we reuse as much as possible of the GitHub infrastructure - Wiki, Issue Tracker, Mailing lists etc.
If we are already bound for some major migrations, let's make the best of them - and a Distributed version control system is a productivity boost.
Also - is there really a point to maintain a particular GroupID (i.e. org.codehaus).
I belive we could/should move Mojo's development efforts into the Apache umbrella (why have 2 sources of normative plugins - apache and codehaus) to simplify for users.
2015-02-27 11:37 GMT+01:00 Arnaud Héritier < [hidden email] > :

>We can ask to Ben (and sonatype/central) but I'm almost sure he'll have nothing to let us use org.codehaus.* for existing projects.
>The question may be for future new plugins. Maybe we should reserve a new groupId and update maven to look at this groupId in addition of org.apache.maven.plugins and org.codehaus.mojo
>
>About sources, I think it was already discussed to move everything to git thus it's just a time constraint to do it now
>For the target hosting github will be fine. I think we already reserved an organization (or two :-)
>https://github.com/maven-mojo/
>https://github.com/codehaus-mojo/
>
>We'll just have to clone repos there when they'll be available in RO on  https://github.com/codehaus/
>I'm not sure if Ben needs some helps for that
>
>About the issue tracker we may ask if we could have a Cloud hosting but it is limited to 1000 accounts and I'm not sure how many accounts in Codehaus Jira instance are related to mojo projects
>Otherwise we can move it to GitHub issues but we'll loose some content (it may be the opportunity to do some cleanup)
>
>About CI and automations ... Cloudbees, TravisCI .... We may ask/test
>
>About web sites .... GitHub sites ?
>
>About Confluence ... Trash ? GitHub Wikis ?
>
>About mailing lists ... Google Groups ??
>
>Do I forget something ?
>
>
>
>
>
>On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Baptiste Mathus < [hidden email] > wrote:
>>Good point Anders, that's indeed something we want to double-check with Codehaus people (btw, who else than Ben, is there anyone else?)
>>
>>2015-02-27 10:50 GMT+01:00 Anders Hammar < [hidden email] > :
>>>Hmmm. Is it only me that sees a problem with the org.codehaus.mojo groupId? Can we continue to use that in the future when syncing to central?
>>>
>>>Other than that I guess this is a good time to migrate to git instead of svn.
>>>
>>>/Anders
>>>
>>>On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 10:38 AM, David Karlsen < [hidden email] > wrote:
>>>>Codehaus.org does not respond  - already EOL? ;)
>>>>The choises seem sane - except for sticking with svn.
>>>>git svn and pointing to the correct places for tags and branches should make it possible to convert each module into a git repo (and use github for hosting).
>>>>
>>>>2015-02-27 10:24 GMT+01:00 Baptiste Mathus < [hidden email] > :
>>>>>Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>>Might be old news to you, but I guess some may not be aware of that news yet:
>>>>>Codehaus is coming to EOL...
>>>>>https://codehaus.org/
>>>>>
>>>>>And it doesn't seem like it's considered to be taken over by other staff members if I read correctly the article (IIUC, this means you cannot even apply to help).
>>>>>
>>>>>So the question is, where do you thin the MOJO project go? And how to do we handle the migration?
>>>>>
>>>>>To sum up quickly, we use:
>>>>>* SCM : SVN (which would make github a hard choice for migration)
>>>>>* JIRA? Ask atlassian for a JIRA SaaS?  https://www.atlassian.com/opensource/overview
>>>>>* CI? Ask CloudBees?  https://www.cloudbees.com/resources/foss/program-details
>>>>>
>>>>>WDYT?
>>>>>
>>>>>--
>>>>>Baptiste
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>>--
>>>>David J. M. Karlsen - http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidkarlsen
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>Baptiste <Batmat> MATHUS -  http://batmat.net
>>Sauvez un arbre,
>>Mangez un castor !
--
--
+==============================+
| Bästa hälsningar,
| [sw. "Best regards"]
|
| Lennart Jörelid
| EAI Architect & Integrator
|
| jGuru Europe AB
| Mölnlycke - Kista
|
| Email: [hidden email]
| URL: www.jguru.se
| Phone
| (skype): jgurueurope
| (intl): +46 708 507 603
| (domestic): 0708 - 507 603
+==============================+
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Codehaus EOL and MOJO migration

Dan Tran
Should we change snapshot to sonatype repo??

On Friday, February 27, 2015, Sergei Ivanov <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi,

I should say, if Codehaus is no more, GitHub would be my obvious first choice of an alternative platform.

1. Version control.
SVN is a dinosaur and a major impediment for contributing and integrating patches. Git provides a much more streamlined workflow from both committer's and contributor's point of view. I used GitHub for importing legacy SVN repos and it worked flawlessly. We never looked back to SVN. In short, let us ditch SVN completely and use this opportunity to migrate to git.

2. Maven web sites.
It is possible to deploy them to GitHub pages for each project. Works a treat, and there is a GitHub maven site plugin to automate the process.

3. Issue tracking.
Use GitHub issue tracking system. It is integrated with pull requests and commits, it is fast and lightweight, it has got milestones and it should cover all needs of a typical project.
I for one will not miss Jira/FishEye/Cricible bundle, because Atlassian products have become a complete sh*t show in the last few years. For the same reason, I have major reservations against BitBucket.
The only outstanding question is whether there is a way to somehow import the existing Jira content into GitHub. If that is not possible or straightforward, then there is a need to find Jira hosting solution elsewhere, at least for the historic content.

4. Code reviews
See above: GitHub has a great support for reviewing the incoming pull requests.

5. Collaboration
GitHub wikis cover that. Again, the question remains whether it is possible to import the existing content there. However, this may be a much lesser problem, because I reckon most of the content is deployed as part of maven sites, and the rest can be imported manually. At the same time, old irrelevant content could be dropped.

6. Continuous Integration
This is one of the services that is not part of GitHub platform. Travis CI might pretty well cover that, and there are other solutions that are free for OSS projects.

7. Binary artifacts
Most of the artifacts go into maven central, anything that does not fit there, could be hosted at Bintray.

Not sure what else Codehaus provides that is not covered by the above.

Kind regards,
--
Sergei


Friday, 27 February 2015 11:51 +0000 from Lennart Jörelid <<a href="javascript:_e(%7B%7D,&#39;cvml&#39;,&#39;lennart.jorelid@gmail.com&#39;);" target="_blank">lennart.jorelid@...>:
I second the opinions for moving to GitHub (or Bitbucket) instead of remaining in SVN.
If doing so, I suggest we reuse as much as possible of the GitHub infrastructure - Wiki, Issue Tracker, Mailing lists etc.
If we are already bound for some major migrations, let's make the best of them - and a Distributed version control system is a productivity boost.
Also - is there really a point to maintain a particular GroupID (i.e. org.codehaus).
I belive we could/should move Mojo's development efforts into the Apache umbrella (why have 2 sources of normative plugins - apache and codehaus) to simplify for users.
2015-02-27 11:37 GMT+01:00 Arnaud Héritier < <a href="javascript:_e(%7B%7D,&#39;cvml&#39;,&#39;aheritier@codehaus.org&#39;);" target="_blank">aheritier@... > :

>We can ask to Ben (and sonatype/central) but I'm almost sure he'll have nothing to let us use org.codehaus.* for existing projects.
>The question may be for future new plugins. Maybe we should reserve a new groupId and update maven to look at this groupId in addition of org.apache.maven.plugins and org.codehaus.mojo
>
>About sources, I think it was already discussed to move everything to git thus it's just a time constraint to do it now
>For the target hosting github will be fine. I think we already reserved an organization (or two :-)
>https://github.com/maven-mojo/
>https://github.com/codehaus-mojo/
>
>We'll just have to clone repos there when they'll be available in RO on  https://github.com/codehaus/
>I'm not sure if Ben needs some helps for that
>
>About the issue tracker we may ask if we could have a Cloud hosting but it is limited to 1000 accounts and I'm not sure how many accounts in Codehaus Jira instance are related to mojo projects
>Otherwise we can move it to GitHub issues but we'll loose some content (it may be the opportunity to do some cleanup)
>
>About CI and automations ... Cloudbees, TravisCI .... We may ask/test
>
>About web sites .... GitHub sites ?
>
>About Confluence ... Trash ? GitHub Wikis ?
>
>About mailing lists ... Google Groups ??
>
>Do I forget something ?
>
>
>
>
>
>On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Baptiste Mathus < <a href="javascript:_e(%7B%7D,&#39;cvml&#39;,&#39;bmathus@batmat.net&#39;);" target="_blank">bmathus@... > wrote:
>>Good point Anders, that's indeed something we want to double-check with Codehaus people (btw, who else than Ben, is there anyone else?)
>>
>>2015-02-27 10:50 GMT+01:00 Anders Hammar < <a href="javascript:_e(%7B%7D,&#39;cvml&#39;,&#39;anders@hammar.net&#39;);" target="_blank">anders@... > :
>>>Hmmm. Is it only me that sees a problem with the org.codehaus.mojo groupId? Can we continue to use that in the future when syncing to central?
>>>
>>>Other than that I guess this is a good time to migrate to git instead of svn.
>>>
>>>/Anders
>>>
>>>On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 10:38 AM, David Karlsen < <a href="javascript:_e(%7B%7D,&#39;cvml&#39;,&#39;davidkarlsen@gmail.com&#39;);" target="_blank">davidkarlsen@... > wrote:
>>>>Codehaus.org does not respond  - already EOL? ;)
>>>>The choises seem sane - except for sticking with svn.
>>>>git svn and pointing to the correct places for tags and branches should make it possible to convert each module into a git repo (and use github for hosting).
>>>>
>>>>2015-02-27 10:24 GMT+01:00 Baptiste Mathus < <a href="javascript:_e(%7B%7D,&#39;cvml&#39;,&#39;bmathus@batmat.net&#39;);" target="_blank">bmathus@... > :
>>>>>Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>>Might be old news to you, but I guess some may not be aware of that news yet:
>>>>>Codehaus is coming to EOL...
>>>>>https://codehaus.org/
>>>>>
>>>>>And it doesn't seem like it's considered to be taken over by other staff members if I read correctly the article (IIUC, this means you cannot even apply to help).
>>>>>
>>>>>So the question is, where do you thin the MOJO project go? And how to do we handle the migration?
>>>>>
>>>>>To sum up quickly, we use:
>>>>>* SCM : SVN (which would make github a hard choice for migration)
>>>>>* JIRA? Ask atlassian for a JIRA SaaS?  https://www.atlassian.com/opensource/overview
>>>>>* CI? Ask CloudBees?  https://www.cloudbees.com/resources/foss/program-details
>>>>>
>>>>>WDYT?
>>>>>
>>>>>--
>>>>>Baptiste
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>>--
>>>>David J. M. Karlsen - http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidkarlsen
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>Baptiste <Batmat> MATHUS -  http://batmat.net
>>Sauvez un arbre,
>>Mangez un castor !
--
--
+==============================+
| Bästa hälsningar,
| [sw. "Best regards"]
|
| Lennart Jörelid
| EAI Architect & Integrator
|
| jGuru Europe AB
| Mölnlycke - Kista
|
| Email: <a href="javascript:_e(%7B%7D,&#39;cvml&#39;,&#39;lj@jguru.se&#39;);" target="_blank">lj@...
| URL: www.jguru.se
| Phone
| (skype): jgurueurope
| (intl): +46 708 507 603
| (domestic): 0708 - 507 603
+==============================+
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Codehaus EOL and MOJO migration

Tony Chemit
In reply to this post by Lennart Jörelid-2
On Fri, 27 Feb 2015 12:51:18 +0100
Lennart Jörelid <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I second the opinions for moving to GitHub (or Bitbucket) instead of
> remaining in SVN.
> If doing so, I suggest we reuse as much as possible of the GitHub
> infrastructure - Wiki, Issue Tracker, Mailing lists etc.
> If we are already bound for some major migrations, let's make the best of
> them - and a Distributed version control system is a productivity boost.
>
> Also - is there really a point to maintain a particular GroupID (i.e.
> org.codehaus).
> I belive we could/should move Mojo's development efforts into the Apache
> umbrella (why have 2 sources of normative plugins - apache and codehaus) to
> simplify for users.

I really like this idea to *merge* mojo projets with maven plugins one or something at apache house.

I guess there is some legal issue about it ? or not ?



--
Tony Chemit
--------------------
tél: +33 (0) 2 40 50 29 28
http://www.codelutin.com
email: [hidden email]
twitter: https://twitter.com/tchemit

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Codehaus EOL and MOJO migration

Dan Tran
Apache process may send some new potential committers away :)

+1 for Github, but stay together under on umbrella of org.code.mojo groupId. 

-D


so we may something similar like that?



On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 11:26 PM, Tony Chemit <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2015 12:51:18 +0100
Lennart Jörelid <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I second the opinions for moving to GitHub (or Bitbucket) instead of
> remaining in SVN.
> If doing so, I suggest we reuse as much as possible of the GitHub
> infrastructure - Wiki, Issue Tracker, Mailing lists etc.
> If we are already bound for some major migrations, let's make the best of
> them - and a Distributed version control system is a productivity boost.
>
> Also - is there really a point to maintain a particular GroupID (i.e.
> org.codehaus).
> I belive we could/should move Mojo's development efforts into the Apache
> umbrella (why have 2 sources of normative plugins - apache and codehaus) to
> simplify for users.

I really like this idea to *merge* mojo projets with maven plugins one or something at apache house.

I guess there is some legal issue about it ? or not ?



--
Tony Chemit
--------------------
tél: <a href="tel:%2B33%20%280%29%202%2040%2050%2029%2028" value="+33240502928" target="_blank">+33 (0) 2 40 50 29 28
http://www.codelutin.com
email: [hidden email]
twitter: https://twitter.com/tchemit

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Codehaus EOL and MOJO migration

Stephen Connolly-2
My vote is move to github.

Mojo exists to hold those plugins that have licenses that are not compatible with being hosted in Apache.

I would say we should move all compatible plugins/components to ASF and leave the license entangled plugins at mojo.

Github issues is fine from my perspective. Not sure about an import process but if somebody has tooling the maven PMC may be able to run said tooling against the JIRA dump to get the issues migrated.

Wiki content is a different issue. I suspect manual curation may be a better option there

On Sunday, March 1, 2015, Dan Tran <[hidden email]> wrote:
Apache process may send some new potential committers away :)

+1 for Github, but stay together under on umbrella of org.code.mojo groupId. 

-D


so we may something similar like that?



On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 11:26 PM, Tony Chemit <<a href="javascript:_e(%7B%7D,&#39;cvml&#39;,&#39;chemit@codelutin.com&#39;);" target="_blank">chemit@...> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2015 12:51:18 +0100
Lennart Jörelid <<a href="javascript:_e(%7B%7D,&#39;cvml&#39;,&#39;lennart.jorelid@gmail.com&#39;);" target="_blank">lennart.jorelid@...> wrote:

> I second the opinions for moving to GitHub (or Bitbucket) instead of
> remaining in SVN.
> If doing so, I suggest we reuse as much as possible of the GitHub
> infrastructure - Wiki, Issue Tracker, Mailing lists etc.
> If we are already bound for some major migrations, let's make the best of
> them - and a Distributed version control system is a productivity boost.
>
> Also - is there really a point to maintain a particular GroupID (i.e.
> org.codehaus).
> I belive we could/should move Mojo's development efforts into the Apache
> umbrella (why have 2 sources of normative plugins - apache and codehaus) to
> simplify for users.

I really like this idea to *merge* mojo projets with maven plugins one or something at apache house.

I guess there is some legal issue about it ? or not ?



--
Tony Chemit
--------------------
tél: <a href="tel:%2B33%20%280%29%202%2040%2050%2029%2028" value="+33240502928" target="_blank">+33 (0) 2 40 50 29 28
http://www.codelutin.com
email: <a href="javascript:_e(%7B%7D,&#39;cvml&#39;,&#39;chemit@codelutin.com&#39;);" target="_blank">chemit@...
twitter: https://twitter.com/tchemit

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email





--
Sent from my phone
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Codehaus EOL and MOJO migration

Dan Tran
is MIT license compatible with ASF license? Mojo has a few MIT ones


-D

On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 12:26 AM, Stephen Connolly <[hidden email]> wrote:
My vote is move to github.

Mojo exists to hold those plugins that have licenses that are not compatible with being hosted in Apache.

I would say we should move all compatible plugins/components to ASF and leave the license entangled plugins at mojo.

Github issues is fine from my perspective. Not sure about an import process but if somebody has tooling the maven PMC may be able to run said tooling against the JIRA dump to get the issues migrated.

Wiki content is a different issue. I suspect manual curation may be a better option there


On Sunday, March 1, 2015, Dan Tran <[hidden email]> wrote:
Apache process may send some new potential committers away :)

+1 for Github, but stay together under on umbrella of org.code.mojo groupId. 

-D


so we may something similar like that?



On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 11:26 PM, Tony Chemit <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2015 12:51:18 +0100
Lennart Jörelid <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I second the opinions for moving to GitHub (or Bitbucket) instead of
> remaining in SVN.
> If doing so, I suggest we reuse as much as possible of the GitHub
> infrastructure - Wiki, Issue Tracker, Mailing lists etc.
> If we are already bound for some major migrations, let's make the best of
> them - and a Distributed version control system is a productivity boost.
>
> Also - is there really a point to maintain a particular GroupID (i.e.
> org.codehaus).
> I belive we could/should move Mojo's development efforts into the Apache
> umbrella (why have 2 sources of normative plugins - apache and codehaus) to
> simplify for users.

I really like this idea to *merge* mojo projets with maven plugins one or something at apache house.

I guess there is some legal issue about it ? or not ?



--
Tony Chemit
--------------------
tél: <a href="tel:%2B33%20%280%29%202%2040%2050%2029%2028" value="+33240502928" target="_blank">+33 (0) 2 40 50 29 28
http://www.codelutin.com
email: [hidden email]
twitter: https://twitter.com/tchemit

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email





--
Sent from my phone

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Codehaus EOL and MOJO migration

Trygve Laugstøl codehaus
In reply to this post by Dan Tran
On Sun, Mar 01, 2015 at 12:14:19AM -0800, Dan Tran wrote:
> Apache process may send some new potential committers away :)
>
> +1 for Github, but stay together under on umbrella of org.code.mojo
> groupId.

+1

The concern with moving to Github is their lack of mailing lists, but I guess a Google group is the best choice these days.

>
> -D
>
> btw, i found this https://github.com/codehaus-plexus
>
> so we may something similar like that?
>
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 11:26 PM, Tony Chemit <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 27 Feb 2015 12:51:18 +0100
> > Lennart Jörelid <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > I second the opinions for moving to GitHub (or Bitbucket) instead of
> > > remaining in SVN.
> > > If doing so, I suggest we reuse as much as possible of the GitHub
> > > infrastructure - Wiki, Issue Tracker, Mailing lists etc.
> > > If we are already bound for some major migrations, let's make the best of
> > > them - and a Distributed version control system is a productivity boost.
> > >
> > > Also - is there really a point to maintain a particular GroupID (i.e.
> > > org.codehaus).
> > > I belive we could/should move Mojo's development efforts into the Apache
> > > umbrella (why have 2 sources of normative plugins - apache and codehaus)
> > to
> > > simplify for users.
> >
> > I really like this idea to *merge* mojo projets with maven plugins one or
> > something at apache house.
> >
> > I guess there is some legal issue about it ? or not ?
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Tony Chemit
> > --------------------
> > tél: +33 (0) 2 40 50 29 28
> > http://www.codelutin.com
> > email: [hidden email]
> > twitter: https://twitter.com/tchemit
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
> >
> >     http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
> >
> >
> >

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Codehaus EOL and MOJO migration

Anders Hammar
In reply to this post by Dan Tran
One of the reasons not moving to ASF is to keep the "process" much simpler/lightweighter. At least that's how I've seen it so far. The threshold to start a new plugin here at Mojos has been very small.
 
But I guess that could be changed. Maybe we could introduce something like the sandbox over att Apache Maven? Or are we talking about starting Apache Mojos?
 
/Anders

On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Dan Tran <[hidden email]> wrote:
is MIT license compatible with ASF license? Mojo has a few MIT ones


-D

On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 12:26 AM, Stephen Connolly <[hidden email]> wrote:
My vote is move to github.

Mojo exists to hold those plugins that have licenses that are not compatible with being hosted in Apache.

I would say we should move all compatible plugins/components to ASF and leave the license entangled plugins at mojo.

Github issues is fine from my perspective. Not sure about an import process but if somebody has tooling the maven PMC may be able to run said tooling against the JIRA dump to get the issues migrated.

Wiki content is a different issue. I suspect manual curation may be a better option there


On Sunday, March 1, 2015, Dan Tran <[hidden email]> wrote:
Apache process may send some new potential committers away :)

+1 for Github, but stay together under on umbrella of org.code.mojo groupId. 

-D


so we may something similar like that?



On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 11:26 PM, Tony Chemit <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 2015 12:51:18 +0100
Lennart Jörelid <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I second the opinions for moving to GitHub (or Bitbucket) instead of
> remaining in SVN.
> If doing so, I suggest we reuse as much as possible of the GitHub
> infrastructure - Wiki, Issue Tracker, Mailing lists etc.
> If we are already bound for some major migrations, let's make the best of
> them - and a Distributed version control system is a productivity boost.
>
> Also - is there really a point to maintain a particular GroupID (i.e.
> org.codehaus).
> I belive we could/should move Mojo's development efforts into the Apache
> umbrella (why have 2 sources of normative plugins - apache and codehaus) to
> simplify for users.

I really like this idea to *merge* mojo projets with maven plugins one or something at apache house.

I guess there is some legal issue about it ? or not ?



--
Tony Chemit
--------------------
tél: <a href="tel:%2B33%20%280%29%202%2040%2050%2029%2028" target="_blank" value="+33240502928">+33 (0) 2 40 50 29 28
http://www.codelutin.com
email: [hidden email]
twitter: https://twitter.com/tchemit

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email





--
Sent from my phone


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re[2]: [mojo-dev] [DISCUSS] Codehaus EOL and MOJO migration

Sergei Ivanov
In reply to this post by Trygve Laugstøl codehaus
Mailing lists are a completely orthogonal feature to the development stack. I am struggling to understand why can they not be hosted somewhere else and why the lack of mailing lists is an impediment to migration to git and GitHub.
--
Sergei


Monday, 2 March 2015 08:38 +0000 from Trygve Laugstøl <[hidden email]>:
On Sun, Mar 01, 2015 at 12:14:19AM -0800, Dan Tran wrote:
> Apache process may send some new potential committers away :)
>
> +1 for Github, but stay together under on umbrella of org.code.mojo
> groupId.
+1
The concern with moving to Github is their lack of mailing lists, but I guess a Google group is the best choice these days.

>
> -D
>
> btw, i found this https://github.com/codehaus-plexus
>
> so we may something similar like that?
>
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 11:26 PM, Tony Chemit < [hidden email] > wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 27 Feb 2015 12:51:18 +0100
> > Lennart Jörelid < [hidden email] > wrote:
> >
> > > I second the opinions for moving to GitHub (or Bitbucket) instead of
> > > remaining in SVN.
> > > If doing so, I suggest we reuse as much as possible of the GitHub
> > > infrastructure - Wiki, Issue Tracker, Mailing lists etc.
> > > If we are already bound for some major migrations, let's make the best of
> > > them - and a Distributed version control system is a productivity boost.
> > >
> > > Also - is there really a point to maintain a particular GroupID (i.e.
> > > org.codehaus).
> > > I belive we could/should move Mojo's development efforts into the Apache
> > > umbrella (why have 2 sources of normative plugins - apache and codehaus)
> > to
> > > simplify for users.
> >
> > I really like this idea to *merge* mojo projets with maven plugins one or
> > something at apache house.
> >
> > I guess there is some legal issue about it ? or not ?
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Tony Chemit
> > --------------------
> > tél: +33 (0) 2 40 50 29 28
> > http://www.codelutin.com
> > email: [hidden email]
> > twitter: https://twitter.com/tchemit
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
> >
> > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
> >
> >
> >
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
     http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re[2]: [mojo-dev] [DISCUSS] Codehaus EOL and MOJO migration

Baptiste MATHUS-3
Even if I agree ML shouldn't be an issue. It's not so unimportant for us as a developer community. We need a wee bit more than just pushing and reviewing code.

2015-03-02 9:46 GMT+01:00 Sergei Ivanov <[hidden email]>:
Mailing lists are a completely orthogonal feature to the development stack. I am struggling to understand why can they not be hosted somewhere else and why the lack of mailing lists is an impediment to migration to git and GitHub.
--
Sergei


Monday, 2 March 2015 08:38 +0000 from Trygve Laugstøl <[hidden email]>:

On Sun, Mar 01, 2015 at 12:14:19AM -0800, Dan Tran wrote:
> Apache process may send some new potential committers away :)
>
> +1 for Github, but stay together under on umbrella of org.code.mojo
> groupId.
+1
The concern with moving to Github is their lack of mailing lists, but I guess a Google group is the best choice these days.

>
> -D
>
> btw, i found this https://github.com/codehaus-plexus
>
> so we may something similar like that?
>
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 11:26 PM, Tony Chemit < [hidden email] > wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 27 Feb 2015 12:51:18 +0100
> > Lennart Jörelid < [hidden email] > wrote:
> >
> > > I second the opinions for moving to GitHub (or Bitbucket) instead of
> > > remaining in SVN.
> > > If doing so, I suggest we reuse as much as possible of the GitHub
> > > infrastructure - Wiki, Issue Tracker, Mailing lists etc.
> > > If we are already bound for some major migrations, let's make the best of
> > > them - and a Distributed version control system is a productivity boost.
> > >
> > > Also - is there really a point to maintain a particular GroupID (i.e.
> > > org.codehaus).
> > > I belive we could/should move Mojo's development efforts into the Apache
> > > umbrella (why have 2 sources of normative plugins - apache and codehaus)
> > to
> > > simplify for users.
> >
> > I really like this idea to *merge* mojo projets with maven plugins one or
> > something at apache house.
> >
> > I guess there is some legal issue about it ? or not ?
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Tony Chemit
> > --------------------
> > tél: <a href="tel:%2B33%20%280%29%202%2040%2050%2029%2028" value="+33240502928" target="_blank">+33 (0) 2 40 50 29 28
> > http://www.codelutin.com
> > email: [hidden email]
> > twitter: https://twitter.com/tchemit
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
> >
> > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
> >
> >
> >
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
     http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email



--
Baptiste <Batmat> MATHUS - http://batmat.net
Sauvez un arbre,
Mangez un castor !
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re[2]: Re[2]: [mojo-dev] [DISCUSS] Codehaus EOL and MOJO migration

Sergei Ivanov
Mailing lists _are_ important. I was not trying to imply that mailing lists should be dropped, merely stating the fact that the functionality could be procured elsewhere and plugged into GitHub. If GitHub does not provide enough flexibility in that respect, then we need to talk to GitHub product team, I am pretty sure they will be listening to the voice of a large developer community.
--
Sergei


Monday, 2 March 2015 09:54 +0000 from Baptiste Mathus <[hidden email]>:
Even if I agree ML shouldn't be an issue. It's not so unimportant for us as a developer community. We need a wee bit more than just pushing and reviewing code.
2015-03-02 9:46 GMT+01:00 Sergei Ivanov < [hidden email] > :

>Mailing lists are a completely orthogonal feature to the development stack. I am struggling to understand why can they not be hosted somewhere else and why the lack of mailing lists is an impediment to migration to git and GitHub.
>--
>Sergei
>>
>>Monday, 2 March 2015 08:38 +0000 from Trygve Laugstøl < [hidden email] >:
>>
>>On Sun, Mar 01, 2015 at 12:14:19AM -0800, Dan Tran wrote:
>>> Apache process may send some new potential committers away :)
>>>
>>> +1 for Github, but stay together under on umbrella of org.code.mojo
>>> groupId.
>>+1
>>The concern with moving to Github is their lack of mailing lists, but I guess a Google group is the best choice these days.
>>>
>>> -D
>>>
>>> btw, i found this https://github.com/codehaus-plexus
>>>
>>> so we may something similar like that?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 11:26 PM, Tony Chemit < [hidden email] > wrote:
>>>
>>> > On Fri, 27 Feb 2015 12:51:18 +0100
>>> > Lennart Jörelid < [hidden email] > wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > I second the opinions for moving to GitHub (or Bitbucket) instead of
>>> > > remaining in SVN.
>>> > > If doing so, I suggest we reuse as much as possible of the GitHub
>>> > > infrastructure - Wiki, Issue Tracker, Mailing lists etc.
>>> > > If we are already bound for some major migrations, let's make the best of
>>> > > them - and a Distributed version control system is a productivity boost.
>>> > >
>>> > > Also - is there really a point to maintain a particular GroupID (i.e.
>>> > > org.codehaus).
>>> > > I belive we could/should move Mojo's development efforts into the Apache
>>> > > umbrella (why have 2 sources of normative plugins - apache and codehaus)
>>> > to
>>> > > simplify for users.
>>> >
>>> > I really like this idea to *merge* mojo projets with maven plugins one or
>>> > something at apache house.
>>> >
>>> > I guess there is some legal issue about it ? or not ?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Tony Chemit
>>> > --------------------
>>> > tél: +33 (0) 2 40 50 29 28
>>> > http://www.codelutin.com
>>> > email: [hidden email]
>>> > twitter: https://twitter.com/tchemit
>>> >
>>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>>> >
>>> > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>>     http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
--
Baptiste <Batmat> MATHUS -  http://batmat.net
Sauvez un arbre,
Mangez un castor !
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Re[2]: Re[2]: [mojo-dev] [DISCUSS] Codehaus EOL and MOJO migration

Lennart Jörelid-2
Fair point.

I would aim at getting the best of both worlds. If I absolutely *have* to move to Apache, I would. But GitHub is currently the better infrastructure and process, I feel.

So ... what do we need which is missing from GitHub presently?

  1. Is the GitHub issue tracker sufficient for our needs? If not - what is missing?
  2. Is the GitHub Wiki documentation feature sufficient for our needs? Can it publish Maven site documentation?
  3. Is the GitHub notification feature sufficient for our needs? Or do we need another location for actual mailing lists which are Discussion-oriented and not related to a particular commit?


2015-03-02 11:06 GMT+01:00 Sergei Ivanov <[hidden email]>:
Mailing lists _are_ important. I was not trying to imply that mailing lists should be dropped, merely stating the fact that the functionality could be procured elsewhere and plugged into GitHub. If GitHub does not provide enough flexibility in that respect, then we need to talk to GitHub product team, I am pretty sure they will be listening to the voice of a large developer community.
--
Sergei


Monday, 2 March 2015 09:54 +0000 from Baptiste Mathus <[hidden email]>:

Even if I agree ML shouldn't be an issue. It's not so unimportant for us as a developer community. We need a wee bit more than just pushing and reviewing code.
2015-03-02 9:46 GMT+01:00 Sergei Ivanov < [hidden email] > :

>Mailing lists are a completely orthogonal feature to the development stack. I am struggling to understand why can they not be hosted somewhere else and why the lack of mailing lists is an impediment to migration to git and GitHub.
>--
>Sergei
>>
>>Monday, 2 March 2015 08:38 +0000 from Trygve Laugstøl < [hidden email] >:
>>
>>On Sun, Mar 01, 2015 at 12:14:19AM -0800, Dan Tran wrote:
>>> Apache process may send some new potential committers away :)
>>>
>>> +1 for Github, but stay together under on umbrella of org.code.mojo
>>> groupId.
>>+1
>>The concern with moving to Github is their lack of mailing lists, but I guess a Google group is the best choice these days.
>>>
>>> -D
>>>
>>> btw, i found this https://github.com/codehaus-plexus
>>>
>>> so we may something similar like that?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 11:26 PM, Tony Chemit < [hidden email] > wrote:
>>>
>>> > On Fri, 27 Feb 2015 12:51:18 +0100
>>> > Lennart Jörelid < [hidden email] > wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > I second the opinions for moving to GitHub (or Bitbucket) instead of
>>> > > remaining in SVN.
>>> > > If doing so, I suggest we reuse as much as possible of the GitHub
>>> > > infrastructure - Wiki, Issue Tracker, Mailing lists etc.
>>> > > If we are already bound for some major migrations, let's make the best of
>>> > > them - and a Distributed version control system is a productivity boost.
>>> > >
>>> > > Also - is there really a point to maintain a particular GroupID (i.e.
>>> > > org.codehaus).
>>> > > I belive we could/should move Mojo's development efforts into the Apache
>>> > > umbrella (why have 2 sources of normative plugins - apache and codehaus)
>>> > to
>>> > > simplify for users.
>>> >
>>> > I really like this idea to *merge* mojo projets with maven plugins one or
>>> > something at apache house.
>>> >
>>> > I guess there is some legal issue about it ? or not ?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Tony Chemit
>>> > --------------------
>>> > tél: <a href="tel:%2B33%20%280%29%202%2040%2050%2029%2028" value="+33240502928" target="_blank">+33 (0) 2 40 50 29 28
>>> > http://www.codelutin.com
>>> > email: [hidden email]
>>> > twitter: https://twitter.com/tchemit
>>> >
>>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>>> >
>>> > http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>>     http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
--
Baptiste <Batmat> MATHUS -  http://batmat.net
Sauvez un arbre,
Mangez un castor !



--
--
+==============================+
| Bästa hälsningar,
| [sw. "Best regards"]
|
| Lennart Jörelid
| EAI Architect & Integrator
|
| jGuru Europe AB
| Mölnlycke - Kista
|
| Email: [hidden email]
| URL:   www.jguru.se
| Phone
| (skype):    jgurueurope
| (intl):     +46 708 507 603
| (domestic): 0708 - 507 603
+==============================+
1234