[yt-dev] Final github repo

[Kacper Kowalik]

On 04/18/2017 09:34 PM, Nathan Goldbaum wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I think the github mirror we set up for testing purposes has been more or
> less a success:
> 
> https://github.com/yt-project/yt-test
> 
> The mirroring seems to work well: the github repository is staying in sync
> with the bitbucket repo every time we merge pull requests on bitbucket. To
> make further work on transitioning to github easier, I'd like to settle on
> what the final converted repo should like.
> 
> For the purposes of discussion, I'd like to propose simply renaming the
> yt-project/yt-test repo to be yt-project/yt and agreeing that the current
> conversion is satisfactory. This means we'll agree not to use an alternate
> conversion technique that will change git commit hashes.

I think we should recreate it from scratch. I force-pushed to it once or
twice stripping some commits. There's a high chance that one of the
forks still have those, and they can be accidentally reintroduced.
Moreover, it only has master(yt) branch. It lacks maintenance(stable),
yt2(yt-2.x) and all the tags.

Cheers,
Kacper

> Our mirror bot uses hg-git, and the converted repo hg-git produces isn't
> necessarily perfect. In particular, two issues have come up:
> 
> * Since git is more selective than mercurial about e-mail and username
> formatting, there are a number of commits associated with dummy e-mail
> addresses like none at none
> 
> * Since we do most of our development on a branch named "yt" (not "default"
> as is typical of mercurial repos) almost every commit in our history has a
> comment in the git commit message recording that it hapenned on the "yt" or
> "stable" branch. This makes it possible to round-trip from hg to git and
> back to hg, but it's also some extra noise in every single commit message.
> 
> We could in principle ameliorate these issues by using something besides
> hg-git to do the conversion or by modifying hg-git to avoid these issues.
> The former options will lose the nice property of being able to round-trip
> and for others to independently export work from their forks. The latter
> option will require us to modify hg-git and waiting for upstream hg-git to
> review our changes, which might take a while, or telling everyone to use a
> hacked version of hg-git.
> 
> Personally, I don't think either of those options are worth the hassle for
> what to me are minor annoyances. I think I've also ameliorated the
> username/e-mail ambiguity in the converted history by adding a .mailmap
> file to the repo:
> 
> https://bitbucket.org/yt_analysis/yt/pull-requests/2582
> 
> In addition, the mirroring process we have now seems to work well, so just
> renaming the yt-test repo and calling the conversion final avoids a bunch
> more work which will block further progress on the conversion.
> 
> What do you all think? It would be great to get people's +/-1 on renaming
> yt-test to yt on github.com/yt-project.
> 
> Once we have a final repo name we will be able to start porting tooling
> like the website generator without worrying about the name or content of
> the final repo changing.
> 
> -Nathan
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> yt-dev mailing list
> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
> 


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.spacepope.org/pipermail/yt-dev-spacepope.org/attachments/20170418/24620487/attachment.pgp>