New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

GitHub Migration Plan #106

Closed
dblodgett-usgs opened this Issue Mar 29, 2017 · 5 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@dblodgett-usgs
Copy link
Contributor

dblodgett-usgs commented Mar 29, 2017

Dear All,

@rsignell-usgs has urged me to comment on the thread related to GitHub and it’s use in place of trac. I don’t have a trac account and couldn’t figure out how to sign up, so I've decided to respond in github to demonstrate what it's about.

As someone who uses GitHub extensively for project planning/management, as a source code repository, and as a registry for development of an in-process OGC standard, I don’t think it’s worth debating the merits of github’s community facilitation model. Rather, the discussion should be how this community wants to migrate its existing activities to GitHub and how the community wants to leverage the github infrastructure.

A few points to note about github's functionality that may be of use to the community.

  1. The CF email list should probably live on near term, at some level, and repeating GitHub notifications through the list is fine. That said, this is the last email list I’m on and I REALLY wish it would move to a searchable indexed list of issues, as I’d like to get the conversations out in the open and not buried in email formatting and archived inboxes. Subscribing is really easy! Joining github is too!
  2. Github issues work just like email if you want to use them that way. Once you’ve watched a repository, you can respond directly to an issue email and your comment shows up in the issue’s discussion.
  3. Using GitHub is easy if you don’t care to use all the software repository features, e.g. branches. There’s super simple wiki functionality, forking a project and editing documents in the browser are super simple and you don’t need to know all the complexities behind it.
  4. A lot more cool stuff can be done... and things can get kind of out of hand... peruse the back issues here or just check out this cherry bomb of a 60-comment thread!

On and on... Like I said above though, the discussion should be how does the community want ot use this system. What the tagging scheme will be, things like repository ownership raised by @marqh in #63, how to deal with stale old pull requests like #35, etc. etc.

Finally, regarding sequencing, I hope we could get 1.7 done and dusted prior to suggesting a full stop change to the infrastructure underlying CF governance. It would make a lot of sense to move 1.7+ into the new space though.

Regards,

Dave

p.s. It's always good practice to finish a new issue with closure criteria so it's original intent is clear. This issue can be closed once a planning of a process to decide how the community wants to use github has started.

@dblodgett-usgs dblodgett-usgs changed the title Migration Plan GitHub Migration Plan Mar 29, 2017

@painter1

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

painter1 commented Mar 30, 2017

I would like to see a move to Github for specific issues, but I think a mailing list is more convenient for unstructured discussions. I see no reason to stick with Trac for issue tracking, although the transition between issue trackers will take some time.

To sign up for the Trac issue tracker, email me! Instructions are in large blue letters on the bottom of every page. Registration used to be automated but then we got spam. This was the surest way I could see to avoid spam on Trac.

Finally, version 1.7 of the CF Conventions document is well along now. The conformance document will follow.

@dblodgett-usgs

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

dblodgett-usgs commented Mar 30, 2017

@dblodgett-usgs

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

dblodgett-usgs commented Apr 10, 2018

Where do we stand on this? The cf email list has been pretty quiet, but this space has been even quieter. @painter1 -- did the tests over in #126 work out?

@painter1

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

painter1 commented Apr 11, 2018

Yes, the tests worked. In fact, your latest entry in the GitHub issue tracker got forwarded to the cf-conventions mailing list, just as it should.

I have a hook in the system for filtering out system messages, but I haven't implemented anything there because there aren't any system messages!

@dblodgett-usgs

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

dblodgett-usgs commented Apr 11, 2018

Great! Then I think my closure criteria are satisfied. I'll go ahead and close this.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment