Skip to content
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

Should blurb and cherry_picker move to their own repos? #329

Open
Mariatta opened this issue May 30, 2019 · 7 comments
Open

Should blurb and cherry_picker move to their own repos? #329

Mariatta opened this issue May 30, 2019 · 7 comments

Comments

@Mariatta
Copy link
Member

@Mariatta Mariatta commented May 30, 2019

When we started with blurb and cherry-picker, they were simply command line tools and not published to PyPI.

Now blurb and cherry-picker are in PyPI independently, each have their own chaneglog, their own License (blurb is BSD, cherry-picker is Apache), their own readme, their own owners; perhaps they should be split into their own repos?

One inconvenience I encountered while both are under the same repo, is https://github.com/python/core-workflow/issues/313. I wanted to move cherry-picker's documentation to readthedocs, but readthedocs support one documentation per repo.

I'm also wondering how having two packages in the same repo affect GitHub's dependency graph 🤔 Perhaps there is no real dependency other than blurb-it depends on blurb, and miss-islington depends on cherry-picker.

@asvetlov
Copy link
Contributor

@asvetlov asvetlov commented May 30, 2019

I think the separation makes sense.

@brettcannon
Copy link
Member

@brettcannon brettcannon commented May 30, 2019

Honestly, I think we should split the projects out and then shut down the repo. This was partially an experiment to see if it would work out better than core-workflow@ and I don't it provides much at this point beyond a place for cherry-picker and blurb. 😄

@Mariatta
Copy link
Member Author

@Mariatta Mariatta commented May 30, 2019

Ok, I can look into moving cherry-picker out. Don't know about shutting down repo. I've been telling people to file general workflow-related issues here, the ones not specific to bots. Just need a different place for that purpose..

@brettcannon
Copy link
Member

@brettcannon brettcannon commented May 30, 2019

@Mariatta I would say issues should potentially be brought up on discuss.python.org, but we can worry about what to do after cherry-picker and blurb move.

@larryhastings FYI

@Mariatta
Copy link
Member Author

@Mariatta Mariatta commented May 30, 2019

I've created a project board for things need doing: https://github.com/python/core-workflow/projects/2

@Mariatta
Copy link
Member Author

@Mariatta Mariatta commented Jun 5, 2019

@larryhastings Can I go ahead and move blurb out? Or you want to do this yourself?

@Mariatta
Copy link
Member Author

@Mariatta Mariatta commented Jun 5, 2019

While I prefer using discourse for discussions over mailing lists, sometimes we need issues to reflect tasks/bugs where we can assign people, and close when the task is done. Discourse doesn't seem to be a natural place for this.

I can't even close my own Discourse post, an admin needs to do it.

So I think this repo is still needed for core-workflow "issues" 🤔

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Linked pull requests

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

None yet
3 participants