Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [modeling-pmc] Project website migration to Git

Wayne,

Yes, I expected that all the projects owned their own websites...  I think it does make sense to migrate them to the root now.

Regards,
Ed

On 13/12/2012 5:35 PM, Wayne Beaton wrote:
Earlier today, I made a recommendation that the EMF Refactor project move their website from /modeling/emft/refactor to /emf-refactor (with a redirect from the old URL to the new one).

There are a handful of projects under EMFT that are actually owned by their project's UNIX group (the others are owned by the top-level project's UNIX group). I don't know if any of these projects need to be located where they are for technical reasons. I assume that--by virtue of being owned by their respective project's groups--they should be relatively easy to move.

These projects are all candidates to just move to a flat stucture:

drwxrwsr-x+  8 emerks  modeling.emft.b3         4096 2010-10-18 09:39 b3
drwxrwsr-x+  2 wkeil   modeling.emft.doc2model  4096 2010-03-15 13:53 doc2model
drwxrwsr-x+  6 glefur  modeling.emf.eef         4096 2010-01-13 05:39 eef
drwxrwsr-x+  6 lgoubet modeling.emf.egf         4096 2010-03-11 16:18 egf
drwxrwsr-x+  9 gdupe   modeling.emft.emf-facet  4096 2011-04-22 07:28 facet
drwxrwsr-x+  8 ckrause modeling.emft.henshin    4096 2012-11-06 16:26 henshin
drwxrwsr-x+  5 tarendt modeling.emft.refactor   4096 2012-07-13 06:30 refactor
.

Since we're looking at a disruption anyway, does it make sense to migrate these directories to the root now? This will reduce the contents of the top-level directory which should make eventual further refactoring easier.

Thoughts?

Wayne

On 12/12/2012 12:44 PM, Ed Willink wrote:
Hi Wayne

Yes.

But emft should be treated as a container project (e.g.tmf), not a support folder (e.g. build).

m2m has already migrated to mmt, so:
- m2m could be discarded
- m2m could be kept as the modeling/m2m sub-folder
- m2m could be migrated as a live m2m container project (clashing with machine-to-machine)
your/Ed Merks' choice. I favour keeping it as modeling/m2m so that it appears in GIT but doesn't
have a new clashing repo that is stale before it's even created.

    Regards

        Ed Willink

On 12/12/2012 15:42, Wayne Beaton wrote:
As Ed stated, /modeling/amalgam and /modeling/mdt have been migrated in place (i.e. /gitroot/www.eclipse.org/modeling/amalgam.git and /gitroot/www.eclipse.org/modeling/mdt.git).

/modeling/gmt has been migrated to /gitroot/www.eclipse.org/gmt.git. We can ask webmaster to set up a redirect from /modeling/gmt to /gmt.

Each of these subdirectories is owned by a particular modeling subproject. Each of these should be migrated to /gitroot/www.eclipse.org/modeling/*.git (e.g. /gitroot/www.eclipse.org/modeling/emf.git) with the same group ownership.

drwxrwsr-x+ 24 nickb     modeling.emf.emf  4096 2012-05-29 09:37 emf
drwxrwsr-x+  2 ahunter   modeling.gmp      4096 2010-05-21 10:12 gmf
drwxrwsr-x+ 20      8301 modeling.gmp      4096 2011-01-27 11:37 gmp
drwxrwsr-x+ 11 nickb     modeling.mmt      4096 2010-11-09 08:34 m2m
drwxrwsr-x+ 19 nickb     modeling.m2t      4096 2012-01-31 04:35 m2t
drwxrwsr-x+  2 ewillink  modeling.mmt      4096 2012-05-14 16:17 mmt
drwxrwsr-x+ 12 sefftinge modeling.tmf      4096 2011-03-10 05:57 tmf

This is left over from a previous termination and can just be removed

drwxrwsr-x+  4 mward     root              4096 2012-03-26 16:20 mddi

I don't know what this is, but I think it needs to just go.
drwxrwsr-x+  2 nickb     modeling          4096 2008-04-26 03:34 yeportal

Which leaves all of these directories. These are all currently owned by the Modeling top-level project so I believe that they should all just be migrated to /gitroot/www.eclipse.org/modeling.git after pruning out all of the above

drwxrwsr-x+  3 nickb     modeling          4096 2011-01-26 15:25 build
-r--rwxr--+  1 mtaal     modeling          3457 2009-03-31 17:05 download.php,v
drwxrwsr-x+  3 nickb     modeling          4096 2009-09-28 16:41 downloads

drwxrwsr-x+ 31 nickb     modeling          4096 2012-11-23 15:45 emft

drwxrwsr-x+  4      8301 modeling          4096 2009-01-02 00:17 images
drwxrwsr-x+  3 emerks    modeling          4096 2012-11-13 07:30 includes
-r--rwxr--+  1 cbrun     modeling         54569 2012-03-09 11:38 index.php,v

-r--rwxr--+  1 mtaal     modeling         16257 2009-03-31 17:05 modeling-charter.php,v
drwxrwsr-x+  3      8301 modeling          4096 2007-10-14 08:13 presentations

-r--rwxr--+  1 mtaal     modeling           731 2009-03-31 17:05 searchcvs.php,v
drwxrwsr-x+  2 nickb     modeling          4096 2008-01-04 15:24 team

drwxrwsr-x+  5 emerks    modeling          4096 2010-06-02 14:49 updates
-r--rwxr--+  1 mward     root              9043 2011-01-26 15:18 _projectCommon.php,v
drwxrwsr-x+  3 mward     root              4096 2008-11-14 09:05 project-info


Does this make sense?

Wayne

On 12/12/2012 02:32 AM, Ed Merks wrote:
Ed,

I'm discussing with Wayne what needs to happen to end up with a reasonable/worksable non-CVS interim result from which we can migrate to a more sensible final structure.

Regards,
Ed


On 10/12/2012 8:17 AM, Ed Willink wrote:
Hi

Ping. What is happening on this?

[For MMT it transpired that a partial flattening had been exploited so that while MMT was not nested in modeling, it still depends on the root modeling scripts.]

    Regards

        Ed Willink


On 04/12/2012 17:03, Ed Willink wrote:
Hi

What is happening about this?

So far we have only two container project GITs.

www.eclipse.org/modeling/amalgam.git
www.eclipse.org/modeling/mdt.git serving BPMN2, Modisco, OCL, Papyrus, UML2 and others

For MDT to work after CVS shutdown, we need a www.eclipse.org/modeling.git trimmed to at least the root and common folders such as build, downloads, images, includes, project-info ... probably every folder that isn't for a 'container' project.

I'll request a www.eclipse.org/modeling/mmt.git in accordance with Kenn's preference that container projects take GIT responsibility for their sub-projects.

    Regards

        Ed Willink

On 01/12/2012 15:27, Kenn Hussey wrote:
Given that a git repository has already been set up for MDT web content, my preference would be the latter.

Kenn

On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 3:07 AM, Ed Willink <ed@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I suggest that the modeling project as a whole should request either a single GIT repo for www/modeling/..., or give detailed instructions on how www/modeling in CVS should be parceled up into non-overlapping per project GIT repo's.



_______________________________________________
modeling-pmc mailing list
modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/modeling-pmc


No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.2793 / Virus Database: 2634/5928 - Release Date: 11/30/12





_______________________________________________
modeling-pmc mailing list
modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/modeling-pmc

  
_______________________________________________
modeling-pmc mailing list
modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/modeling-pmc

--
Wayne Beaton
The Eclipse Foundation
Twitter: @waynebeaton
Explore Eclipse Projects
EclipseCon 2013


_______________________________________________
modeling-pmc mailing list
modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/modeling-pmc


No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2013.0.2805 / Virus Database: 2634/5951 - Release Date: 12/11/12


_______________________________________________ modeling-pmc mailing list modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/modeling-pmc

--
Wayne Beaton
The Eclipse Foundation
Twitter: @waynebeaton
Explore Eclipse Projects
EclipseCon
            2013


_______________________________________________
modeling-pmc mailing list
modeling-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/modeling-pmc


Back to the top