juneau-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Craig Russell <craig.russ...@oracle.com>
Subject Re: Git repo up
Date Mon, 01 Aug 2016 00:54:00 GMT

> On Jul 31, 2016, at 5:31 PM, John D. Ament <johndament@apache.org> wrote:
> Now that there's code in the repo, I've entered the requests to enable
> github integration.  This will notify dev@ for PRs being raised, and mirror
> the repo on to github.
> More in line.
> On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 8:22 PM James Bognar <james.bognar@salesforce.com>
> wrote:
>> I've uploaded the contents of Juno from JazzHub.
>> Peter and I have been working on the package renames and release scripts on
>> the GitHub repo.  But we've also been adding new functionality as well.  If
>> we want a minimal release, then I think we should merge the package renames
>> and script changes (Peter's work on converting the ANT scripts to Maven),
>> but hold of on the new feature work.  I'll work on these tomorrow.
> Its only a recommendation.  I raise it as a good first step since many
> projects will falter on bad dependencies coming into the ASF.  We can limit
> some of those issues by doing proper governance up front.  We can limit
> this if the first release is only rebranding, to make sure we're building
> on a solid foundation.
> Some of the first must haves I see are:
> - Remove .class files from the code base (as well as any other binaries and
> eclipse IDE configs)
> - Rename to ASF normalized names
> - Apply headers
> - Use proper NOTICE etc.
> - Get build scripts and CI running
> I don't have a strong preference for doing any of this before new feature
> work. I would love to see a first release within 3 months, but that's
> always me being wishful.
> We should start/restart discussions around:
> - Issue tracking
> - Committer workflow
> - CI Jobs/tools
> - Build tools
> Hopefully some of those discussions will entice the already invited team
> members to sign up for the dev list.
>> I've created an "initial" branch with the initial contents.
> Is this permanent, or just for your own sanity?  Now that the SGA has been
> executed, once the headers are updated and NOTICE established we shouldn't
> need the initial import.

I think you mean we don’t need the initial branch. I agree. Using master should be just
fine. That said, I’m not a git expert but it seems that git branches should be for shared
feature work and merged to master as quickly as possible.

> Craig - you'll know this part better than me.  I've seen the incubator stop
> doing IP Clearances.  My understanding has always been that IP Clearance is
> only for post imported code, e.g. if I were to donate Hammock (based on a
> prior thread) that would require IP Clearance.  This import doesn't require
> IP, right?  Even then, if we have an SGA on file, when is IP Clearance
> required?

IP Clearance is always required for podlings as part of new project initiation. 

As you describe above the optional IP Clearance for non-incubator projects is to bring in
big changes from outside. 

The incubator IP Clearance basically is now done for juneau. We have the ibm-juno.pdf grant
on file and the code just imported is under that grant. So we’re done. 

>> On Sat, Jul 30, 2016 at 11:38 PM, John D. Ament <johndament@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>> All,
>>> Looks like the git repo is ready to go.  After the code import is done,
>> we
>>> should tackle some of the basics:
>>> - Package renames
>>> - Release scripts
>>> - KEYS file
>>> The git repo is here:
>>> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator-juneau.git
>>> I always push hard that the first release should be very minimalistic.
>> Its
>>> good to demonstrate ASF compatibility early on, so even if its just a
>>> release that takes the existing donated code and constitutes a public
>>> release that should be great.
>>> John
>> --
>> James Bognar

Craig L Russell
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!

View raw message