Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-devel - Re: [cc-devel] GitHub migration

cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Developer discussion for Creative Commons technology and tools

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Dan Mills <dan AT creativecommons.org>
  • To: "Mr. Puneet Kishor" <punkish AT creativecommons.org>
  • Cc: "cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org" <cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [cc-devel] GitHub migration
  • Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2013 23:21:07 -0700

Hey there,

I'm sorry for the too brief and somewhat flippant answer the other
day, I didn't mean to say it that way. I am pushing our code to GitHub
because it's pretty much _the_ standard these days for git hosting,
including for open source projects. That means it's generally easier
for developers to find, use, and contribute to the project. It's also
got excellent tools for managing bugs, pull requests, etc., and very
good API access as well. So while it's not perfect by any means, it's
pretty great, and far and away better than what we have now.

Anyway... I just finished migrating our old subversion repository into
individual git repositories. Conversion notes and logs are here:

https://github.com/creativecommons/cc-svn-migration

Project repositories are all up on GitHub now:

https://github.com/creativecommons

There are a few things that given infinite time I would've fixed up.
If anyone wants to work on them as a project, let me know and we can
work out how you can get access to the svn repository DB (if needed).
These include:

* Making sure that authors have correct emails assigned. Subversion
doesn't track this, git does. So everyone has an email like <svn
username>@committer.creativecommons.org assigned. You'd need to track
down people and build a mapping file which the svn2git conversion tool
can use.
* Svn tags are really branches. I added rules to prepend "tag--" to
anything in /tags/ but left them as branches in git. These could be
converted to actual git tags, assuming they have no additional commits
in them (which is possible in svn, since as I said they are really
branches).
* I spent some time trying to capture the right history for each
project as things got reorganized on svn, but if anyone wants to
double-check, see the cc.rules file and talk to me to get the svn
server's db files.

If anyone spots anything _wrong_ let me know so I can fix it ASAP.

Dan


On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Dan Mills <dan AT creativecommons.org> wrote:
> Yes, I considered it. GitHub is just better.
>
> Dan
>
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 1:23 PM, Mr. Puneet Kishor
> <punkish AT creativecommons.org> wrote:
>> Did we consider Gitorious given that its source code is available and, as
>> such, it is at least philosophically more aligned with CC's normative
>> goals than Github may be? I do want to underscore that I have no reason to
>> doubt Github's creds for citizenship in the open community other than the
>> fact that Github's source code itself is not open source.
>>
>>> On Oct 24, 2013, at 4:06 PM, Dan Mills <dan AT creativecommons.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Just wanted to give you all a heads up that I'm moving all of our
>>> sources to GitHub:
>>>
>>> https://github.com/creativecommons/
>>>
>>> So far I've migrated all of the git repositories, svn ones are quite a
>>> bit harder to migrate (and preserve history), but hopefully those will
>>> be up there within the week as well.
>>>
>>> Dan
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> cc-devel mailing list
>>> cc-devel AT lists.ibiblio.org
>>> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-devel




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page