On 09/12/2011 12:02 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
On Sep 12, 2011, at 5:50 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
> On 09/12/2011 03:15 AM, Vincent Massol wrote:
>>
>> On Sep 12, 2011, at 9:07 AM, Thomas Mortagne wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 9:06 AM, Thomas Mortagne
>>> <thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 9:00 AM, Vincent Massol<vincent(a)massol.net>
wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sep 12, 2011, at 8:49 AM, Thomas Mortagne wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 8:15 AM, Vincent
Massol<vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> Result: 5 +1, 1 +0 and no -1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The vote is passed. I'll try to move them today to
https://github.com/xwiki-contrib/sandbox (note that the calendar plugin will be renamed
since there's already a xwiki-calendar module in there - not sure what it is, probably
a GSOC one).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why in sandbox ? I would say either in their own repository or in
retired.
>>>>>
>>>>> Because:
>>>>> 1) own repo means that the project is active and someone is an owner
of it. We don't have any owner for these projects ATM. They can be graduated from
sandbox when someone takes the ownership and release a new version of them.
>>>>> 2) retired mean that these projects are not useful any more and have
been replaced by better stuff. I think they're still useful for most of them, at least
for: photo album, calendar, exo, alexa, adwords and s5. For workstream it's possible
it's not useful anymore with our new message stream.
>>>>>
>>>>> Said differently retired projects means to people: don't even
bother about those, they're dead and not useful any more. While sandbox means: these
projects are in uncertain states but can still be useful if someone brings a little love
to them.
>>>>>
>>>>> At least that's how I view the difference.
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course, these projets use the old plugin technology so we could
decide that anything that uses the old plugin tech should be retired. But if we do this we
need to decide this for all other projects using plugin tech too, not just these ones and
there are lots of plugin projects in their own repos and in sandbox (not mentioning the
several plugins that even in platform and that are not retired). We should also consider
that some people may be using the photo album or calendar plugins so moving them to
retired isn't a good idea IMO.
>>>>>
>>>>> WDYT?
>>>>
>>>> Problem whit moving theses project to sandbox is that sandbox does not
>>>> fits very well project which already have tags and branches and
>>>> several versions already. If a project was graduate from sandbox to
>>>> own repository and because not very active anymore I doubt we would
>>>
>>> s/because/became/
>>>
>>>> put it back in sandbox.
>>
>> Indeed, that's a good point but we need to find a good general solution
because this is what we'd be doing when moving stuff to retired too! :)
>>
>> Maybe we should just have one repo for each project whatever its state (retired,
sandbox, etc) and instead indicate its state in a READM file in that module (or maybe in
its name with a convention but I don't know how easy/bad it is to rename a repo so a
README file sounds easier).
>
> +1, but we'll leave the existing sandbox and retired in place.
...for the moment.
Why? (apart form the fact that it's tedious to
move stuff out but this can be automated I guess).
For that reason, and also because many things have been moved without
history in retired, so there's not much benefit in moving them in a new
repository.
Thanks
-Vincent
>
>> If we do this then we don't need a notion of sandbox/retired/active anymore.
We just need to ensure that we give some visibility for people looking at these repos.
>>
>> For example for plugins we could put in the README something like: "This
extension uses the plugin technology which has been deprecated and is now replaced by
Components (see …). If someone is interested in improving this extension, we recommend
rewriting it as components."
>> OR (for ex for calendar)
>> "This extension hasn't been active for a long time. However it's an
interesting extension that could benefit from being contributed to the XWiki platform.
However in order for this to happen we would need someone to rewrite using components,
make it follow the xwiki platform best practices, add some tests and create a pull request
on the XWiki platform git repo"
>>
>> Thanks
>> -Vincent
>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>> -Vincent
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>> -Vincent
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Apr 5, 2011, at 6:55 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm proposing to move the following modules from
xwiki-platform-core to separate git repos in a xwiki-contrib organization on GitHub:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> xwiki-platform-calendar
>>>>>>>> xwiki-platform-exo
>>>>>>>> xwiki-platform-adwords
>>>>>>>> xwiki-platform-alexa
>>>>>>>> xwiki-platform-photoalbum
>>>>>>>> xwiki-platform-s5
>>>>>>>> xwiki-platform-workstream
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Rationale:
>>>>>>>> * They're no longer working or supported
>>>>>>>> * We can move them back if the xwiki dev team wants to
support them again in the future
>>>>>>>> * It's cleaner than having a retired module in the
xwiki organization since a) it's not "polluting" the list of repos supported
by the xwiki dev team and b) it allows them to be separated in repos
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Future:
>>>>>>>> * Also move modules currently in svn contrib to
xwiki-contrib org. Note that we need to verify if the svn app works with the GitHub svn
integration too since several users of svn contrib are using it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Here's my +1
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>> -Vincent
--
Sergiu Dumitriu
http://purl.org/net/sergiu/