move to git.

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 28/04/2015 16:48, Adam Heath a écrit :
> Something about the 3 laws

I'm more a Philip K. Dick aficionado, I believe robots will not follow the laws at some point, hu are we serious? ;D

Jacques

[Jacques Le Roux]

Thanks for taking the time to clarify Gil, I was in a hurry and did not put enough information, let me clarify my point.

I only wanted to speak about the tool used to create, maintain and share extensions. For the moment the "OFBiz-France solution" (actually more
Nereides one) is based on the patch command and the addons manager.
The idea here was, if ever the OFBiz project would use Git instead of Svn, maybe the OFBiz-France solution could be based on Github and maintained as
described below by David. Still a lot of of speculations, but better to think ahead even if nothing happens ;)

Jacques

Le 21/04/2015 15:09, Gil portenseigne a écrit :

> Hi all,
>
> First to clarify things, OFBiz-france association goal is to promote Apache OFBiz into french speaking audience by giving references (information,
> classifications and links) to extensions (documentations, addons, patchs or packaged solution), maybe hosting some high quality not contributable
> extensions.
> Helping extensions' owner improving their quality to convert its into OFBiz contribution if possible, or referencing them for easy sharing of
> classified solutions.
> Creating a tool integrated into Apache OFBiz too manage and share anyone devs by implementing a new extension manager
> (http://ofbiz.markmail.org/message/goxbqcgurpoy2yfp?q=ofbiz-fr without success for now :) )
>
> Nereide Leverage of addon solutions, like you introduce is just an illustration of this process. Nereide as a member of the association will give as
> example some instance of extensions, hoping that other contribution and contributor will come (and be welcome).
>
> I think that this git solution of *creating a consortium [...]* is quite different (even if i do not understand all the ins and out of it) and might
> be more comparable to ofbizextra effort, to give the ability for everyone to develop and share using a dedicated tool.
>
> And because everything which is committed into Apache OFBiz project has to be validated, and development within Integrators Projects do not have the
> same rythm/pace, ofbizextra was created to store and share unfinished/specific/not ready quality wise devs and this has to be out of Apache OFBiz.
>
> My personal opinion is (i'm not a git user), that SVN seems quite sufficient for Apache OFBiz needs. I remind me reading that there is already a git
> repository of the trunk branch so, if true, it can be used by contributor too make their devs using it. I'm not relevent evaluating git usage, but i
> do not feel a real problem using SVN.
>
> In every case, contribution will have to be given within Jira to get into the project.
>
> Best Regards
>
> Gil
>
>
> On 21/04/2015 12:19, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>
>> Le 21/04/2015 12:02, David E. Jones a écrit :
>>>> On 20 Apr 2015, at 23:21, Pierre Smits <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Quoting:
>>>>
>>>> We are also prepared to be assertive regarding this situation. If the
>>>> project
>>>> does not move to GIT then Brainfood is willing to participate in a
>>>> consortium of
>>>> organizations that will peer with each other to share updates to the master
>>>> branch for their local OFBiz repository. Such an arrangement will,
>>>> effectively,
>>>> result in a distributed master repository image.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks Ean for the position of *Brainfood* in this position. It comes
>>>> across as 'Do it our way, or else'. You are free to make such statements
>>>> and when followed through there will be consequences. For all participating
>>>> in this project. One I can see standing out clearly is: no more
>>>> participation in/contribution from the employees of Brainfood and from the
>>>> other companies in that consortium back into the project.
>>> That's not at all what I get from Ean's comments. The magic of a community-driven project is that people can collaborate on anything they want,
>>> within the scope of the main project or as side projects. If the main project doesn't provide something desired, then it is perfectly appropriate
>>> for others to collaborate on that... better than doing it totally isolated.
>>>
>>> What Ean is talking about ties in with the general idea of distributed source management and distributed development. The general idea is that
>>> there may be many forks of the main source repo, potentially with various branches for different improvements and changes. These are generally
>>> made available publicly, like public GitHub forks of other public repositories (though with git they can be hosted anywhere).
>>>
>>> Those who make changes can request that particular changes be pulled into upstream repositories and then those who maintain the upstream repos (or
>>> the main project repo if it bubbles up that high) can review them and pull the changes if desired. Those who maintain upstream repos can also look
>>> around for useful changes in forked repos and pull them in as desired. Others who run their own forks can pull in changes from peer repositories too.
>>>
>>> It may seem like chaos to have forks and changes spread all over the place... but that isn't caused by the distributed source management approach,
>>> it's just made visible and clear by the approach. Right now this exists on a large scale for OFBiz, tons of forks and changes in them, but they
>>> are mostly not visible or publicly available so there is no way for OFBiz committers to pull changes from other repos... they basically have to be
>>> extracted into a patch file and submitted through a Jira issue.
>>>
>>> In other words, the chaos exists and the distributed source management enabled by git just makes it easier to track it all and tame it a bit.
>>>
>>> On a side note, this is one of the reasons I have concerns about making Moqui and related projects part of the ASF: the ASF community approach
>>> doesn't fit very well with this distributed source management model (pull requests are discouraged, all contributions should go through Jira
>>> issues... though I don't know that this is a strict policy).
>>>
>>> -David
>>
>> Interesting David, it can be compared to the OFBiz-France association effort to leverage the Nereides addons and addons manager. I let aside the
>> licenses issues, as long as it's no part of a released package there are no problems.
>> What do you think OFBiz-France members?
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>>>
>>>> If that is going to happen, I will say: 'I thank you for all the
>>>> contributions you did to the project'. And I will check in my sentiments at
>>>> the door. I do hope that if you do you also resign totally from this
>>>> project.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I rather have the community comes to its decision based on sound/valid
>>>> arguments, not (veiled) threats.
>>>> l
>>>> Best regards,
>>>>
>>>> Pierre Smits
>>>>
>>>> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
>>>> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
>>>> Based Manufacturing, Professional
>>>> Services and Retail & Trade
>>>> http://www.orrtiz.com
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 2:08 AM, Ean Schuessler <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>>> From: "Jacques Le Roux" <[hidden email]>
>>>>>> Subject: Re: move to git.
>>>>>> Like Adrian and mostly for the same reasons, I don't believe we need Git.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But there is one other major reason which has already been discussed in
>>>>> the
>>>>>> other common ASF MLs.  As Taher exulted, it's possible to create local
>>>>>> branches. So people are able to do a lot of work alone without
>>>>> exchanging before
>>>>>> committing or submitting. It will certainly not help to have this
>>>>>> possibility.
>>>>> I disagree. It is useful in many situations for OFBiz developers to create
>>>>> a
>>>>> local repository that is not globally shared. Some customers may even
>>>>> require
>>>>> such a situation for security or legal reasons.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Remember our recent discussion on the lack or core commits reviews.
>>>>>> With Git you end with commits bursts or big patches and it's then
>>>>>> hard to review and too late to share ideas.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So unlike Adrian, I'm even strongly against it. I will not hesitate to
>>>>> use a -1
>>>>>> if necessary!
>>>>> We are also prepared to be assertive regarding this situation. If the
>>>>> project
>>>>> does not move to GIT then Brainfood is willing to participate in a
>>>>> consortium of
>>>>> organizations that will peer with each other to share updates to the master
>>>>> branch for their local OFBiz repository. Such an arrangement will,
>>>>> effectively,
>>>>> result in a distributed master repository image.
>>>>>
>>>>> If anyone else is interested in such an arrangement please feel free to
>>>>> speak
>>>>> up and we can begin the planning process.
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>

[Gil Portenseigne]

Yeah Jacques, i got your point, but clarification was needed to avoid the assimilation of Nereide and OFBiz-France association (no lobbying or so).

Clearly if Git is adopted (even if not I guess, there is a workaround) there will be a new way to share/maintain solution around OFBiz.

Like i said i didn't had the time to learn more about git, but from what i read in the thread, it could be a good tool.

Gil

On 29/04/2015 14:47, Jacques Le Roux wrote:

Thanks for taking the time to clarify Gil, I was in a hurry and did not put enough information, let me clarify my point.

I only wanted to speak about the tool used to create, maintain and share extensions. For the moment the "OFBiz-France solution" (actually more Nereides one) is based on the patch command and the addons manager.
The idea here was, if ever the OFBiz project would use Git instead of Svn, maybe the OFBiz-France solution could be based on Github and maintained as described below by David. Still a lot of of speculations, but better to think ahead even if nothing happens ;)

Jacques

Le 21/04/2015 15:09, Gil portenseigne a écrit :

Hi all,

First to clarify things, OFBiz-france association goal is to promote Apache OFBiz into french speaking audience by giving references (information, classifications and links) to extensions (documentations, addons, patchs or packaged solution), maybe hosting some high quality not contributable extensions.
Helping extensions' owner improving their quality to convert its into OFBiz contribution if possible, or referencing them for easy sharing of classified solutions.
Creating a tool integrated into Apache OFBiz too manage and share anyone devs by implementing a new extension manager (http://ofbiz.markmail.org/message/goxbqcgurpoy2yfp?q=ofbiz-fr without success for now :) )

Nereide Leverage of addon solutions, like you introduce is just an illustration of this process. Nereide as a member of the association will give as example some instance of extensions, hoping that other contribution and contributor will come (and be welcome).

I think that this git solution of *creating a consortium [...]* is quite different (even if i do not understand all the ins and out of it) and might be more comparable to ofbizextra effort, to give the ability for everyone to develop and share using a dedicated tool.

And because everything which is committed into Apache OFBiz project has to be validated, and development within Integrators Projects do not have the same rythm/pace, ofbizextra was created to store and share unfinished/specific/not ready quality wise devs and this has to be out of Apache OFBiz.

My personal opinion is (i'm not a git user), that SVN seems quite sufficient for Apache OFBiz needs. I remind me reading that there is already a git repository of the trunk branch so, if true, it can be used by contributor too make their devs using it. I'm not relevent evaluating git usage, but i do not feel a real problem using SVN.

In every case, contribution will have to be given within Jira to get into the project.

Best Regards

Gil


On 21/04/2015 12:19, Jacques Le Roux wrote:

Le 21/04/2015 12:02, David E. Jones a écrit :

On 20 Apr 2015, at 23:21, Pierre Smits [hidden email] wrote:

Quoting:

We are also prepared to be assertive regarding this situation. If the
project
does not move to GIT then Brainfood is willing to participate in a
consortium of
organizations that will peer with each other to share updates to the master
branch for their local OFBiz repository. Such an arrangement will,
effectively,
result in a distributed master repository image.

Thanks Ean for the position of *Brainfood* in this position. It comes
across as 'Do it our way, or else'. You are free to make such statements
and when followed through there will be consequences. For all participating
in this project. One I can see standing out clearly is: no more
participation in/contribution from the employees of Brainfood and from the
other companies in that consortium back into the project.

That's not at all what I get from Ean's comments. The magic of a community-driven project is that people can collaborate on anything they want, within the scope of the main project or as side projects. If the main project doesn't provide something desired, then it is perfectly appropriate for others to collaborate on that... better than doing it totally isolated.

What Ean is talking about ties in with the general idea of distributed source management and distributed development. The general idea is that there may be many forks of the main source repo, potentially with various branches for different improvements and changes. These are generally made available publicly, like public GitHub forks of other public repositories (though with git they can be hosted anywhere).

Those who make changes can request that particular changes be pulled into upstream repositories and then those who maintain the upstream repos (or the main project repo if it bubbles up that high) can review them and pull the changes if desired. Those who maintain upstream repos can also look around for useful changes in forked repos and pull them in as desired. Others who run their own forks can pull in changes from peer repositories too.

It may seem like chaos to have forks and changes spread all over the place... but that isn't caused by the distributed source management approach, it's just made visible and clear by the approach. Right now this exists on a large scale for OFBiz, tons of forks and changes in them, but they are mostly not visible or publicly available so there is no way for OFBiz committers to pull changes from other repos... they basically have to be extracted into a patch file and submitted through a Jira issue.

In other words, the chaos exists and the distributed source management enabled by git just makes it easier to track it all and tame it a bit.

On a side note, this is one of the reasons I have concerns about making Moqui and related projects part of the ASF: the ASF community approach doesn't fit very well with this distributed source management model (pull requests are discouraged, all contributions should go through Jira issues... though I don't know that this is a strict policy).

-David

Interesting David, it can be compared to the OFBiz-France association effort to leverage the Nereides addons and addons manager. I let aside the licenses issues, as long as it's no part of a released package there are no problems.
What do you think OFBiz-France members?

Jacques

If that is going to happen, I will say: 'I thank you for all the
contributions you did to the project'. And I will check in my sentiments at
the door. I do hope that if you do you also resign totally from this
project.


I rather have the community comes to its decision based on sound/valid
arguments, not (veiled) threats.
l
Best regards,

Pierre Smits

*ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
Services & Solutions for Cloud-
Based Manufacturing, Professional
Services and Retail & Trade
http://www.orrtiz.com

On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 2:08 AM, Ean Schuessler [hidden email] wrote:

----- Original Message -----

From: "Jacques Le Roux" [hidden email]
Subject: Re: move to git.
Like Adrian and mostly for the same reasons, I don't believe we need Git.

But there is one other major reason which has already been discussed in

the

other common ASF MLs.  As Taher exulted, it's possible to create local
branches. So people are able to do a lot of work alone without

exchanging before

committing or submitting. It will certainly not help to have this
possibility.

I disagree. It is useful in many situations for OFBiz developers to create
a
local repository that is not globally shared. Some customers may even
require
such a situation for security or legal reasons.

Remember our recent discussion on the lack or core commits reviews.
With Git you end with commits bursts or big patches and it's then
hard to review and too late to share ideas.

So unlike Adrian, I'm even strongly against it. I will not hesitate to

use a -1

if necessary!

We are also prepared to be assertive regarding this situation. If the
project
does not move to GIT then Brainfood is willing to participate in a
consortium of
organizations that will peer with each other to share updates to the master
branch for their local OFBiz repository. Such an arrangement will,
effectively,
result in a distributed master repository image.

If anyone else is interested in such an arrangement please feel free to
speak
up and we can begin the planning process.

[Jacques Le Roux]

Related to this thread but not with previous discussions, see how Github is used at the ASF https://wiki.apache.org/commons/UsingGIT ; notably for
"Applying Pull Requests (for svn based components)"

Jacques

[Adam Heath-2]

On 04/29/2015 02:26 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> Related to this thread but not with previous discussions, see how
> Github is used at the ASF https://wiki.apache.org/commons/UsingGIT ;
> notably for "Applying Pull Requests (for svn based components)"
>
> Jacques

Yeah, that's actually troubling.  The recommended procedure for merging
git changes is to apply a patch.  There is no recommendation on how to
attribute the original contributor.

The next section that talks about merging github into projects that use
git also doesn't mention anything about CLA of the code being merged
either.  But at least the attribution is maintained automatically.

[Jacques Le Roux]

Le 29/04/2015 21:47, Adam Heath a écrit :

>
> On 04/29/2015 02:26 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>> Related to this thread but not with previous discussions, see how Github is used at the ASF https://wiki.apache.org/commons/UsingGIT ; notably for
>> "Applying Pull Requests (for svn based components)"
>>
>> Jacques
>
> Yeah, that's actually troubling.  The recommended procedure for merging git changes is to apply a patch.  There is no recommendation on how to
> attribute the original contributor.
>
> The next section that talks about merging github into projects that use git also doesn't mention anything about CLA of the code being merged
> either.  But at least the attribution is maintained automatically.
>
>

It's OK if the "component" is in an ASF Git repo (https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/). In the 1st section I read "In a way, the Apache committer
acts here as a proxy for the contributor, and makes sure everything is good to include. (Consequently Git can have different authors and commiters of
a commit. If pulled in as git-patch or pull request the author is preserved)."

Jacques

[Hans Bakker]

As the discussions seem to end, can i propose a vote?

The question : should we convert the master SVN repository of Apache
OFBIz to a GIT version?
The possible answers are according the apache voting guidelines at:
https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html

  *

    +1: 'Yes lets do it'

  * +0: 'I don't feel strongly about it, but I'm okay with this.'
  *

    -0.5: 'I don't like this idea, but I can't find any rational
    justification for my feelings.'

  *

    ++1: 'Wow! I like this! Let's /do/ it!'

  *

    -0.9: 'I /really/ don't like this, but I'm not going to stand in the
    way if everyone else wants to go ahead with it.'

  *

    +0.9: 'This is a cool idea and i like it, but I don't have time/the
    skills necessary to help out.'

  * -1 'I do not want this.'


Votes will be possible for one week from today.

Regards,
Hans

On 20/04/15 11:38, Hans Bakker wrote:
> As discussed at apachecon in Austin, i propose to switch from svn to
> git for the ofbiz repository. The main reason being that all major
> contributors are using git and contributions are cumbersome, further,
> git allows for better branching and merging.
>
> Regards,
> Hans

[Scott Gray-3]

+0

I like git and use it primarily but I'm not sure that adoption of git at
the ASF has reached the point where I'm prepared to force it onto the
unwilling.
On 5 May 2015 15:01, "Hans Bakker" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> As the discussions seem to end, can i propose a vote?
>
> The question : should we convert the master SVN repository of Apache OFBIz
> to a GIT version?
> The possible answers are according the apache voting guidelines at:
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>
>  *
>
>    +1: 'Yes lets do it'
>
>  * +0: 'I don't feel strongly about it, but I'm okay with this.'
>  *
>
>    -0.5: 'I don't like this idea, but I can't find any rational
>    justification for my feelings.'
>
>  *
>
>    ++1: 'Wow! I like this! Let's /do/ it!'
>
>  *
>
>    -0.9: 'I /really/ don't like this, but I'm not going to stand in the
>    way if everyone else wants to go ahead with it.'
>
>  *
>
>    +0.9: 'This is a cool idea and i like it, but I don't have time/the
>    skills necessary to help out.'
>
>  * -1 'I do not want this.'
>
>
> Votes will be possible for one week from today.
>
> Regards,
> Hans
>
> On 20/04/15 11:38, Hans Bakker wrote:
>
>> As discussed at apachecon in Austin, i propose to switch from svn to git
>> for the ofbiz repository. The main reason being that all major contributors
>> are using git and contributions are cumbersome, further, git allows for
>> better branching and merging.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Hans
>>
>
>

[Adam Heath-2]

This may be the nail in the coffin, at least for now, but +0, needs more
discussion/planning.  I've been using git-svn for longer than most with
ofbiz, and would really love it if we were already using git, but it's
just too soon.

Just because git is decentralized, doesn't mean that there is no longer
a center. *Someone* has to be pulling/merging all the branches, and who
would step up to that plate?  Who would want to take on the mantel?  I
don't think we as a community are ready to require that of someone.

Of course, we need to start planning for this eventuality, imho, but we
are still a long ways off.

ps: I, and others, will continue to use git in our upstream svn
interactions, as that seems to work well enough

pps: as per Adrian's vote call, there is nothing actionable here.

On 05/04/2015 10:01 PM, Hans Bakker wrote:

> As the discussions seem to end, can i propose a vote?
>
> The question : should we convert the master SVN repository of Apache
> OFBIz to a GIT version?
> The possible answers are according the apache voting guidelines at:
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>
>  *
>
>    +1: 'Yes lets do it'
>
>  * +0: 'I don't feel strongly about it, but I'm okay with this.'
>  *
>
>    -0.5: 'I don't like this idea, but I can't find any rational
>    justification for my feelings.'
>
>  *
>
>    ++1: 'Wow! I like this! Let's /do/ it!'
>
>  *
>
>    -0.9: 'I /really/ don't like this, but I'm not going to stand in the
>    way if everyone else wants to go ahead with it.'
>
>  *
>
>    +0.9: 'This is a cool idea and i like it, but I don't have time/the
>    skills necessary to help out.'
>
>  * -1 'I do not want this.'
>
>
> Votes will be possible for one week from today.
>
> Regards,
> Hans
>
> On 20/04/15 11:38, Hans Bakker wrote:
>> As discussed at apachecon in Austin, i propose to switch from svn to
>> git for the ofbiz repository. The main reason being that all major
>> contributors are using git and contributions are cumbersome, further,
>> git allows for better branching and merging.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Hans
>

[Christian Geisert]

Am 05.05.2015 05:01, schrieb Hans Bakker:
> As the discussions seem to end, can i propose a vote?

+0

I personally prefer git anytime over svn, but it seems a few people are
not comfortable with git (yet). I'm using it already with ofbiz locally
(no commit via git yet but will try it soon)

Christian

[Michael Brohl-3]

+0

Git is a great tool once you understand the mechanisms and get used to it.
But I also think that it might be too early to make it the main source
control for the project. It takes extra effort for some and the
committers have to handle pull requests and such.

With the other bigger sub projects in mind (Maven, Moqui etc.) I think
we should not force it right now. The benefits are not that strong.

Regards,

Michael Brohl
ecomify GmbH
www.ecomify.de


Am 05.05.15 um 05:01 schrieb Hans Bakker:

> As the discussions seem to end, can i propose a vote?
>
> The question : should we convert the master SVN repository of Apache
> OFBIz to a GIT version?
> The possible answers are according the apache voting guidelines at:
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>
>  *
>
>    +1: 'Yes lets do it'
>
>  * +0: 'I don't feel strongly about it, but I'm okay with this.'
>  *
>
>    -0.5: 'I don't like this idea, but I can't find any rational
>    justification for my feelings.'
>
>  *
>
>    ++1: 'Wow! I like this! Let's /do/ it!'
>
>  *
>
>    -0.9: 'I /really/ don't like this, but I'm not going to stand in the
>    way if everyone else wants to go ahead with it.'
>
>  *
>
>    +0.9: 'This is a cool idea and i like it, but I don't have time/the
>    skills necessary to help out.'
>
>  * -1 'I do not want this.'
>
>
> Votes will be possible for one week from today.
>
> Regards,
> Hans
>
> On 20/04/15 11:38, Hans Bakker wrote:
>> As discussed at apachecon in Austin, i propose to switch from svn to
>> git for the ofbiz repository. The main reason being that all major
>> contributors are using git and contributions are cumbersome, further,
>> git allows for better branching and merging.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Hans
>

[Martin Becker]

[Martin Becker]

Full ack for Adams remarks.

There should be a +0.5 like „I like this idea, but the realization has to be well planned for a point in the future where the all over organization fits the needs for a different contribution process" ;-)

So, +0.5 from me.

Martin Becker
ecomify GmbH
www.ecomify.de

> Am 05.05.2015 um 06:25 schrieb Adam Heath <[hidden email]>:
>
> This may be the nail in the coffin, at least for now, but +0, needs more discussion/planning.  I've been using git-svn for longer than most with ofbiz, and would really love it if we were already using git, but it's just too soon.
>
> Just because git is decentralized, doesn't mean that there is no longer a center. *Someone* has to be pulling/merging all the branches, and who would step up to that plate?  Who would want to take on the mantel?  I don't think we as a community are ready to require that of someone.
>
> Of course, we need to start planning for this eventuality, imho, but we are still a long ways off.
>
> ps: I, and others, will continue to use git in our upstream svn interactions, as that seems to work well enough
>
> pps: as per Adrian's vote call, there is nothing actionable here.
>
> On 05/04/2015 10:01 PM, Hans Bakker wrote:
>> As the discussions seem to end, can i propose a vote?
>>
>> The question : should we convert the master SVN repository of Apache OFBIz to a GIT version?
>> The possible answers are according the apache voting guidelines at: https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>>
>> *
>>
>>   +1: 'Yes lets do it'
>>
>> * +0: 'I don't feel strongly about it, but I'm okay with this.'
>> *
>>
>>   -0.5: 'I don't like this idea, but I can't find any rational
>>   justification for my feelings.'
>>
>> *
>>
>>   ++1: 'Wow! I like this! Let's /do/ it!'
>>
>> *
>>
>>   -0.9: 'I /really/ don't like this, but I'm not going to stand in the
>>   way if everyone else wants to go ahead with it.'
>>
>> *
>>
>>   +0.9: 'This is a cool idea and i like it, but I don't have time/the
>>   skills necessary to help out.'
>>
>> * -1 'I do not want this.'
>>
>>
>> Votes will be possible for one week from today.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Hans
>>
>> On 20/04/15 11:38, Hans Bakker wrote:
>>> As discussed at apachecon in Austin, i propose to switch from svn to git for the ofbiz repository. The main reason being that all major contributors are using git and contributions are cumbersome, further, git allows for better branching and merging.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Hans
>>
>

[Adrian Crum-3]

+0

Adrian Crum
Sandglass Software
www.sandglass-software.com

On 5/4/2015 8:01 PM, Hans Bakker wrote:

> As the discussions seem to end, can i propose a vote?
>
> The question : should we convert the master SVN repository of Apache
> OFBIz to a GIT version?
> The possible answers are according the apache voting guidelines at:
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>
>   *
>
>     +1: 'Yes lets do it'
>
>   * +0: 'I don't feel strongly about it, but I'm okay with this.'
>   *
>
>     -0.5: 'I don't like this idea, but I can't find any rational
>     justification for my feelings.'
>
>   *
>
>     ++1: 'Wow! I like this! Let's /do/ it!'
>
>   *
>
>     -0.9: 'I /really/ don't like this, but I'm not going to stand in the
>     way if everyone else wants to go ahead with it.'
>
>   *
>
>     +0.9: 'This is a cool idea and i like it, but I don't have time/the
>     skills necessary to help out.'
>
>   * -1 'I do not want this.'
>
>
> Votes will be possible for one week from today.
>
> Regards,
> Hans
>
> On 20/04/15 11:38, Hans Bakker wrote:
>> As discussed at apachecon in Austin, i propose to switch from svn to
>> git for the ofbiz repository. The main reason being that all major
>> contributors are using git and contributions are cumbersome, further,
>> git allows for better branching and merging.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Hans
>

[Nicolas Malin-2]

-0  (maybe it's the same that +0 ;) ), I vote +0 when I will use git,
but currently the fthe fear of change :).

Le 05/05/2015 05:01, Hans Bakker a écrit :

> As the discussions seem to end, can i propose a vote?
>
> The question : should we convert the master SVN repository of Apache
> OFBIz to a GIT version?
> The possible answers are according the apache voting guidelines at:
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>
>  *
>
>    +1: 'Yes lets do it'
>
>  * +0: 'I don't feel strongly about it, but I'm okay with this.'
>  *
>
>    -0.5: 'I don't like this idea, but I can't find any rational
>    justification for my feelings.'
>
>  *
>
>    ++1: 'Wow! I like this! Let's /do/ it!'
>
>  *
>
>    -0.9: 'I /really/ don't like this, but I'm not going to stand in the
>    way if everyone else wants to go ahead with it.'
>
>  *
>
>    +0.9: 'This is a cool idea and i like it, but I don't have time/the
>    skills necessary to help out.'
>
>  * -1 'I do not want this.'
>
>
> Votes will be possible for one week from today.
>
> Regards,
> Hans
>
> On 20/04/15 11:38, Hans Bakker wrote:
>> As discussed at apachecon in Austin, i propose to switch from svn to
>> git for the ofbiz repository. The main reason being that all major
>> contributors are using git and contributions are cumbersome, further,
>> git allows for better branching and merging.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Hans
>

[Gil Portenseigne]

+0

On 05/05/2015 05:01, Hans Bakker wrote:

> As the discussions seem to end, can i propose a vote?
>
> The question : should we convert the master SVN repository of Apache
> OFBIz to a GIT version?
> The possible answers are according the apache voting guidelines at:
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>
>  *
>
>    +1: 'Yes lets do it'
>
>  * +0: 'I don't feel strongly about it, but I'm okay with this.'
>  *
>
>    -0.5: 'I don't like this idea, but I can't find any rational
>    justification for my feelings.'
>
>  *
>
>    ++1: 'Wow! I like this! Let's /do/ it!'
>
>  *
>
>    -0.9: 'I /really/ don't like this, but I'm not going to stand in the
>    way if everyone else wants to go ahead with it.'
>
>  *
>
>    +0.9: 'This is a cool idea and i like it, but I don't have time/the
>    skills necessary to help out.'
>
>  * -1 'I do not want this.'
>
>
> Votes will be possible for one week from today.
>
> Regards,
> Hans
>
> On 20/04/15 11:38, Hans Bakker wrote:
>> As discussed at apachecon in Austin, i propose to switch from svn to
>> git for the ofbiz repository. The main reason being that all major
>> contributors are using git and contributions are cumbersome, further,
>> git allows for better branching and merging.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Hans
>

[JulienNicolas]

+0.9

Julien.

Le 05/05/2015 05:01, Hans Bakker a écrit :

> As the discussions seem to end, can i propose a vote?
>
> The question : should we convert the master SVN repository of Apache
> OFBIz to a GIT version?
> The possible answers are according the apache voting guidelines at:
> https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>
>  *
>
>    +1: 'Yes lets do it'
>
>  * +0: 'I don't feel strongly about it, but I'm okay with this.'
>  *
>
>    -0.5: 'I don't like this idea, but I can't find any rational
>    justification for my feelings.'
>
>  *
>
>    ++1: 'Wow! I like this! Let's /do/ it!'
>
>  *
>
>    -0.9: 'I /really/ don't like this, but I'm not going to stand in the
>    way if everyone else wants to go ahead with it.'
>
>  *
>
>    +0.9: 'This is a cool idea and i like it, but I don't have time/the
>    skills necessary to help out.'
>
>  * -1 'I do not want this.'
>
>
> Votes will be possible for one week from today.
>
> Regards,
> Hans
>
> On 20/04/15 11:38, Hans Bakker wrote:
>> As discussed at apachecon in Austin, i propose to switch from svn to
>> git for the ofbiz repository. The main reason being that all major
>> contributors are using git and contributions are cumbersome, further,
>> git allows for better branching and merging.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Hans
>

[Jacopo Cappellato-5]

-1

not because I don't like Git or because I don't think it wouldn't be a good fit for OFBiz; the reason for my negative vote is that in the vote there is no mention to the workflow the project will adopt; at the ASF there are some limitations due to Infrastructure and/or license/legal reasons and not all the way Git could be used are allowed (for example I don't think we will be allowed to accept Pull Requests from GitHub).

There are several ASF projects that have switched to Git (https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf ) but the workflows they have adopted are different from the ones implied by some of the comments in this mailing list; see for example:
http://karaf.apache.org/index/community/contributing.html (this is very similar to our current svn-based workflow)
http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/GitAndHadoop (patch based contributions)

I have mentioned a few times that until someone will take time to review what others do and what can be done @ASF with Git and come up with a proposal for OFBiz, my vote will be negative because it doesn't make any sense to vote for a tool or the other.

Jacopo

On May 5, 2015, at 5:01 AM, Hans Bakker <[hidden email]> wrote:

> As the discussions seem to end, can i propose a vote?
>
> The question : should we convert the master SVN repository of Apache OFBIz to a GIT version?
> The possible answers are according the apache voting guidelines at: https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>
> *
>
>   +1: 'Yes lets do it'
>
> * +0: 'I don't feel strongly about it, but I'm okay with this.'
> *
>
>   -0.5: 'I don't like this idea, but I can't find any rational
>   justification for my feelings.'
>
> *
>
>   ++1: 'Wow! I like this! Let's /do/ it!'
>
> *
>
>   -0.9: 'I /really/ don't like this, but I'm not going to stand in the
>   way if everyone else wants to go ahead with it.'
>
> *
>
>   +0.9: 'This is a cool idea and i like it, but I don't have time/the
>   skills necessary to help out.'
>
> * -1 'I do not want this.'
>
>
> Votes will be possible for one week from today.
>
> Regards,
> Hans
>
> On 20/04/15 11:38, Hans Bakker wrote:
>> As discussed at apachecon in Austin, i propose to switch from svn to git for the ofbiz repository. The main reason being that all major contributors are using git and contributions are cumbersome, further, git allows for better branching and merging.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Hans
>

[Adam Heath-2]

That's my point as well.  These most recent votes have not had concrete
actions attached to them.  Without a concrete plan, any kind of +# vote
is not definitive; a +1 could mean anything in these cases.

I chose +0 instead of -0 or -1, as I do believe git is the right
approach, but we need more time to figure out what will change.

* How does the submit-as-patch workflow change with Jira(still allow for
patch, but also allow for fork(clone)/push/merge-request)?

* How to deal with empty directories(svn allows them, git does not)?

* Do we try to support signed commits?

* Should Acked-By, Signed-off-By, etc be adopted as pseudo tags(see the
linux-kernel's use of git)?

* Use pseudo tags for Jira issues?

* What about CLA for all those fork/clone above?

* Who are the Lieutenants, and who is the Dictator(the linux kernel way,
not a suggestion for us)?

* What about line-ending changes?  Git has a feature(.gitattributes,
.git/info/attributes) that allow for many different flags to be set;
what would those values be?

These are just off the top of my head.

On 05/05/2015 08:06 AM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:

> -1
>
> not because I don't like Git or because I don't think it wouldn't be a good fit for OFBiz; the reason for my negative vote is that in the vote there is no mention to the workflow the project will adopt; at the ASF there are some limitations due to Infrastructure and/or license/legal reasons and not all the way Git could be used are allowed (for example I don't think we will be allowed to accept Pull Requests from GitHub).
>
> There are several ASF projects that have switched to Git (https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf ) but the workflows they have adopted are different from the ones implied by some of the comments in this mailing list; see for example:
> http://karaf.apache.org/index/community/contributing.html (this is very similar to our current svn-based workflow)
> http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/GitAndHadoop (patch based contributions)
>
> I have mentioned a few times that until someone will take time to review what others do and what can be done @ASF with Git and come up with a proposal for OFBiz, my vote will be negative because it doesn't make any sense to vote for a tool or the other.
>
> Jacopo
>
> On May 5, 2015, at 5:01 AM, Hans Bakker <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> As the discussions seem to end, can i propose a vote?
>>
>> The question : should we convert the master SVN repository of Apache OFBIz to a GIT version?
>> The possible answers are according the apache voting guidelines at: https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>>
>> *
>>
>>    +1: 'Yes lets do it'
>>
>> * +0: 'I don't feel strongly about it, but I'm okay with this.'
>> *
>>
>>    -0.5: 'I don't like this idea, but I can't find any rational
>>    justification for my feelings.'
>>
>> *
>>
>>    ++1: 'Wow! I like this! Let's /do/ it!'
>>
>> *
>>
>>    -0.9: 'I /really/ don't like this, but I'm not going to stand in the
>>    way if everyone else wants to go ahead with it.'
>>
>> *
>>
>>    +0.9: 'This is a cool idea and i like it, but I don't have time/the
>>    skills necessary to help out.'
>>
>> * -1 'I do not want this.'
>>
>>
>> Votes will be possible for one week from today.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Hans
>>
>> On 20/04/15 11:38, Hans Bakker wrote:
>>> As discussed at apachecon in Austin, i propose to switch from svn to git for the ofbiz repository. The main reason being that all major contributors are using git and contributions are cumbersome, further, git allows for better branching and merging.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Hans

[Hans Bakker]

Jacopo,

This vote was about IF we choose to go to Git, if the answer is yes,
sure then we need an implementation plan.

It is no use, setting up an implementation plan when there is still a
possibility people will reject it.

Regards,
Hans

PS. We really have to change the way we work here, I admire Adam,
spending so much time on maven when people can still reject it.



On 05/05/15 20:06, Jacopo Cappellato wrote:

> -1
>
> not because I don't like Git or because I don't think it wouldn't be a good fit for OFBiz; the reason for my negative vote is that in the vote there is no mention to the workflow the project will adopt; at the ASF there are some limitations due to Infrastructure and/or license/legal reasons and not all the way Git could be used are allowed (for example I don't think we will be allowed to accept Pull Requests from GitHub).
>
> There are several ASF projects that have switched to Git (https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf ) but the workflows they have adopted are different from the ones implied by some of the comments in this mailing list; see for example:
> http://karaf.apache.org/index/community/contributing.html (this is very similar to our current svn-based workflow)
> http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/GitAndHadoop (patch based contributions)
>
> I have mentioned a few times that until someone will take time to review what others do and what can be done @ASF with Git and come up with a proposal for OFBiz, my vote will be negative because it doesn't make any sense to vote for a tool or the other.
>
> Jacopo
>
> On May 5, 2015, at 5:01 AM, Hans Bakker <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> As the discussions seem to end, can i propose a vote?
>>
>> The question : should we convert the master SVN repository of Apache OFBIz to a GIT version?
>> The possible answers are according the apache voting guidelines at: https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
>>
>> *
>>
>>    +1: 'Yes lets do it'
>>
>> * +0: 'I don't feel strongly about it, but I'm okay with this.'
>> *
>>
>>    -0.5: 'I don't like this idea, but I can't find any rational
>>    justification for my feelings.'
>>
>> *
>>
>>    ++1: 'Wow! I like this! Let's /do/ it!'
>>
>> *
>>
>>    -0.9: 'I /really/ don't like this, but I'm not going to stand in the
>>    way if everyone else wants to go ahead with it.'
>>
>> *
>>
>>    +0.9: 'This is a cool idea and i like it, but I don't have time/the
>>    skills necessary to help out.'
>>
>> * -1 'I do not want this.'
>>
>>
>> Votes will be possible for one week from today.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Hans
>>
>> On 20/04/15 11:38, Hans Bakker wrote:
>>> As discussed at apachecon in Austin, i propose to switch from svn to git for the ofbiz repository. The main reason being that all major contributors are using git and contributions are cumbersome, further, git allows for better branching and merging.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Hans