-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 632
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
Splitting this repository #3352
Comments
The above docs explain how we can remove a subdirectory from the main repository without rewriting history on it, but preserve the git history of the subfolder when we add it to the new repo. |
I like this idea - wondering if anyone has any objections/downsides apart from the effort required to map the split in the repo and transfer the data? Are we worried at all that it will make it harder for people to feel empowered to contribute and if so how would we combat this? (this is me slightly catastrophising, I still think we should do this!) |
(Sorry, I clicked the wrong thing on my phone and turned one of the checkboxes into an issue accidentally) |
That's a good question @Arielle-Bennett. I would hope that having clear, distinct repos would help people find what they are looking for, prevent conflicts, make each part seem less overwhelming. |
Thanks @JimMadge - I agree, we might also ask working groups / the wider community to help ensure each repo has a clear purpose and explicit contribution pathways outlined so that it's clear for newer people how to contribute to each 👍🏻 |
In addition to that, possibly guidelines on what kinds of repo are acceptable or not to be created in/moved to the org? JupyterHub have been working on an idea to create a new org where the indication is that the repos there are less developed, not strictly maintained by the core JupyterHub team, and may not receive regular patches or releases, so we have been drawing up guidance around "what characteristics should a repo in this org have?". Please feel free to read, obvs YMMV https://hackmd.io/@yuvipanda/B1el-jExp |
Hello all, following our January monthly meeting, @da5nsy @aleesteele and I will start working on the road map to split the repo during the Collab cafe this Wednesday. Please feel free to join us. |
I can be there for the first half @AlexandraAAJ then I have to switch to something else. :) |
Following conversations at collab cafe today I did a technical dry run with the newsletter subfolder: @sgibson91 - I did need to rename the old branch so that I could merge it into the new main ( The summary:
(make new github repo, public, and with something to initialise it - I chose a readme, which in hindsight was a poor decision since the folder already had a readme so there was a merge conflict later)
|
If someone from @the-turing-way/infrastructure could take a look at the new repo and check that it all looks good, that would be awesome! I think the main thing to check is that the history is preserved (LGTM). |
I think the next steps would be to look into transferring live issues/PRs over to that new repo, to see what that process (if one exists at all?) is like |
@da5nsy would you feel able to open a PR to add any missing steps/gotchas you learned from this experience? https://github.com/2i2c-org/infrastructure/blob/master/docs/howto/update-env.md#split-up-an-image-for-use-with-the-repo2docker-action |
I think the only thing would be the branch rename, and I don't know where in the original instructions that would be best put (or in fact if it's relevant?) 🤔 Otherwise, things that tripped me up were either things that I expect everyone else knows (yes, imposter syndrome etc etc) or specific to the fact that I was modifying the use case.
|
Maybe we could transfer some of the existing news-letter-related issues to the new repository, to test if that works @da5nsy? Thanks so much for this transition. I just took a look at the repo, which looks good to me in terms of its content. |
Looks to me like the |
Just tested with https://github.com/the-turing-way/the-turing-way/issues/3465, seems to have worked AFAIC |
I thinking we would have to manually transfer open PRs (e.g. #3469). I guess if we wanted to be extra fancy we could preserve the specific relevant branches when we do the transfers, but we'd still have to make the PR again, and so I think in most cases (there shouldn't be many cases, assuming we keep the book in the-turing-way/the-turing-way) it'll make sense to rebuild the PR from scratch, link to it from the old one and close the old one. |
Summary
Currently, this repository is used for multiple purposes. For example, the following activities are committed,
Now that we have a GitHub org, we can create multiple repositories to split separable items into their own repositories.
This will have a number of benefits,
What needs to be done?
(For example, the-turing-way/book, the-turing-way/meeting-notes, the-turing-way/newsletters)
We should be able to avoid rewriting history on the book repository. However, files will be deleted and we should make sure everyone is aware where things have been moved
Who can help?
Updates
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: