Migration from Sourceforge #4

Open
larsnaesbye opened this Issue Jan 19, 2017 · 26 comments

Projects

None yet

3 participants

@larsnaesbye
Member
larsnaesbye commented Jan 19, 2017 edited
  • Re-import entire SVN repo through the importer, mapping contributors to their GH accounts
  • Establish a way of downloading the latest stable release on GH
  • Put up notice on SF that we are moving, and the code is updated on GH from now
  • Move the webpages over to a GH Pages branch (this might change the URL of the page)
  • Copy all information over in GH Wiki
  • Copy open issues and questions over
  • After a while - close the SF repo
@larsnaesbye larsnaesbye added this to the 3.10 milestone Jan 19, 2017
@larsnaesbye
Member

Could we start with moving over issue tracking from SF? Like stopping new issues, closing the ones we can, and then move the rest over?

@shirishag75

umm... there is this script which might help https://github.com/cmungall/gosf2github but it does have some limitations and requirements -

Requirements:

TIP:

Note that the API does not grant permission to create the tickets as
if they were created by the original user, so if your token was
generated from your account, it will look like you submitted the
ticket and comments.

Create an account for an agent like https://github.com/bbopjenkins -
use this account to generate the token. This may be better than having
everything show up under your own personal account

Hope it's useful.

@larsnaesbye
Member

What do you say? Should I just copy/paste the SF issues over?

@shirishag75

@larsnaesbye . I just did one at #8 . You will need to put the forwarding address at the sourceforge.net ticket and close it (I don't have admin access there) and put from where it is being imported in the ticket here .

Would have preferred to import the user account but for that to happen, you would have to use the script. Optionally you could use connect with the reporters and ask them to put the report here and just close the bugs there.

@larsnaesbye
Member

Cool! I closed it at Sourceforge with a reference. Feel free to copy/paste the others over and I will also close them up :)

@larsnaesbye
Member

I'm migrating the rest over myself. Seems easier that way.

@larsnaesbye
Member

It is done :-) Now we need to move the code over.....

@shirishag75
shirishag75 commented Feb 14, 2017 edited

@larsnaesbye I didn't want to announce after moving over each bug, hence it was good you went that way.

Did you look at the discussion that we had for migrating code over... Git and Github are good with code, not so good with binary images.

@larsnaesbye
Member

No I didnt....was is on FaceBook?

@shirishag75
shirishag75 commented Feb 14, 2017 edited

@larsnaesbye nope...actually in my head :( Apparently git is not so good with binary images. See some of the discussions on stackoverflow precisely on this topic -

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1911005/git-and-binary-data#1911054

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3618447/using-git-for-images

as well as

http://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/80962/should-images-be-stored-in-a-git-repository

the consensus of most of the discussions has been have the images remain in svn as a sub-module triggered by git while the code-base is in git.

There are two points to consider -

  • Git is not good with managing diffs between binary images unlike it is with text

  • Each image that you put via git is also copied in the hidden ~/.git directory as well.

Both of the above will swell the image directory quite a bit.

Anyways, you and @mokun need to simplify and keep all images together which I had shared on e-mail as a finding. That actually would be quite a task in itself.

@larsnaesbye
Member

Hmmm...I don't see the links as making a good case for not moving. Do we really have that many large binary files? I know that we could clean up a lot too...

@larsnaesbye
Member

I'm thinking about moving the wiki over next...

@shirishag75
shirishag75 commented Feb 16, 2017 edited

@larsnaesbye Go ahead about the wiki. About binary images ideally, first cleaning up and then having some sort of history and understanding as to how often the changes to the binary files would let us have some idea of the future.

If for instance, binary files are not touched for many a year, then it might make sense to move them over to git, if on the other hand, there are frequent changes to the binary images, either new binary images or texturing, higher resolution pictures etc. then it might make sense to split the repository in two, the code part and the images part with images remaining in the svn module while the rest of the code moves onto git.

Also remember that github has space limitations (even for foss projects) so we can't allow it to grow exponentially, see https://help.github.com/articles/what-is-my-disk-quota/ . Hope it clears some of the confusion.

@larsnaesbye
Member

I know, but we've been notoriously bad about including everything ever tried out in the repository. If we are forced to clean up just a tiny bit, then it's only good IMHO.

@shirishag75

true. That is the reason why Git has branches

@larsnaesbye larsnaesbye removed this from the 3.10 milestone Feb 19, 2017
@larsnaesbye
Member

I've now moved most of the wiki over. Some pages I skipped because they contained things we've already done. There are 3 pages that have important images or formatting I'll have to look deeper into:

  • Getting_Started_with_MSP
  • Setting_up_a_MSP_development_environment_with_the_command_line
  • UML_Diagrams

Images might have to be stored in a separate repo, like when we move the webpages over to GitHub Pages. I'll look into this, but please do edit away on what's been ported already :)

@mokun
Member
mokun commented Feb 20, 2017
@larsnaesbye
Member

Yeah, I've wondered too how people manage to have it expanded by default, like here.

@shirishag75

umm... has anybody looked at settings ? Specifically https://github.com/mars-sim/mars-sim/settings . For some reasons, github pages is disabled while the wiki has pages. Could somebody look into that ?

@larsnaesbye
Member

That's not the same thing, I'm afraid. Github Pages is web pages served through a web server, but the wiki is just another repository of .md files (or whatever we choose).

@larsnaesbye
Member

An example of GitHub Pages is this: http://larsnaesbye.github.io/tempus/ - from a dead project of mine.

@shirishag75

all is good. I asked the github people and this is what they had to say -

Thanks for writing in! Your Wiki had a custom sidebar titled "misc" which was preventing the automatically generated sidebar from being unfolded onto the page by default. The custom sidebar was empty, so I deleted it for you. Your Wiki's sidebar is now displayed by default.

https://github.com/mars-sim/mars-sim/wiki

@larsnaesbye
Member

Yeah! Also know that you can clone wikis and add other files to them. This is how I plan to add images :-)

@mokun
Member
mokun commented Feb 21, 2017

Shirshag,

Thanks for engaging us in getting things rolling and also contacting github to remove the side bar.

Lars,

Thanks for converting those wiki pages.

I can see you add some new pages with "Project Development Idea: Roads", etc, yestersday.

I've processed a few of them--lightly edited the formats, updated the contents, added new comments. etc.

Once done, I'll move the edited page to under "D. New Proposals".

Just so you know.

-Manny

@larsnaesbye
Member

I have now added a /images folder to the wiki. You will need to check out the wiki as a git repo in order to access it. The UML diagrams have been put in there and they're now displayed on the UML diagrams page.

@larsnaesbye
Member

Wiki moved over. Next up should be the Web Pages :-)

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