Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] CGRAN down indefinitely, but hopefully not for long (want feedback)

[Martin Braun]

On 10/03/2014 12:44 AM, George Nychis wrote:
> Marcus,  I like the idea of an uber-repo with external submodules.  That
> would mean these submodules could link to a repo we could provide the
> user, a repo they already have on github, or a repo they have on some
> other external server.  But in the end, our uber repo would point to all
> of them and then they could update the commit that external submodule
> points to over time.  Thanks for that suggestion.

Sorry for being a buzzkill here,

but I don't really like this except as a temporary/transition solution.
Assume CGRAN really takes off and grows. Do you really want all OOTs out
there in a single repo? What exactly is their logical connection, which
would warrant them all being tied together in a super-repo?
This would require someone to keep updating the submodules, too, which
seems unnecessary.

In the long run, I would assume people want to host their OOTs on github
(or similar services), and CGRAN would simply be a link to those.
As I said, during a transition time, we might want something else.
But submodules are messy, and I suggest not using them for this
particular application.

M


> Rick, thanks for this suggestion also!  I will make sure that we are
> able to include some sort of snapshot.  When you say snapshot here, does
> that act as some sort of release or history?  It must be different than
> a tag, since you say tags are part of a snapshot.  Can you give me an
> example snapshot provided by some other service?
> 
> On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 7:51 AM, Marcus Müller <address@hidden
> <mailto:address@hidden>> wrote:
> 
>     Hi everyone,
> 
>     that seems to be a nice solution you're proposing, George. What
>     about having a uber-repo that uses external submodules? This way,
>     you could have your single CGRAN repo, with all the packages as
>     submodules, some documentation in a single wiki, all per gitlab, and
>     just keep the projects as independent repos, hosted on a cgran
>     machine or on github/osmocom/wherever. We get the functionality to
>     backup "all the GNU Radio ecosystem" at once by running some git
>     submodule update command, and pybombs could just clone that repo,
>     and init submodules as the user installs them.
> 
>     Greetings,
>     Marcus
> 
> 
>     On 30.09.2014 01:00, George Nychis wrote:
>>     I agree with Martin that once we go to git, every project has its own
>>     independent repo.  That shouldn't take much time at all to do, I can just
>>     run some svn2git magic to spit out separate repositories.  The question
>>     will be where those repositories live.  I can host the repositories 
>> again.
>>     I could replace the tired Trac interface with Gitlab and then host the
>>     repositories locally and through there.  If that's the case, Github
>>     repositories could be forked in Gitlab and/or point to the Github repos?
>>     (e.g., for people who only want their code on Github).  I think the
>>     downside of Gitlab is that it doesn't seem to be very customizable to, 
>> for
>>     example, have a coherent single Wiki of some sort like Trac dd.  It will 
>> be
>>     a bunch of separate Wikis buried in to each separate repository's page.
>>
>>     So I think we are agreeing so far on git with multiple repositories for
>>     each project.  What we need to figure out is what the frontend is.
>>
>>     On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Martin Braun <address@hidden> 
>> <mailto:address@hidden>
>>     wrote:
>>
>>>     On 29.09.2014 14:55, Marcus D. Leech wrote:
>>>
>>>>     I have no religious convictions about git vs svn.
>>>>
>>>>     I'd have to change a couple of scripts [...]
>>>>
>>>     When CGRAN was inaugurated, github wasn't as popular as it was (and GNU
>>>     Radio was still on SVN itself). We would not have gone for a central SVN
>>>     repo if github had been on our radar back then.
>>>
>>>     I guess most people either share Marcus' sentiment, or are biased 
>>> towards
>>>     git. So, ditching SVN is pretty much a no-brainer.
>>>
>>>     However, one major difference between SVN and git is that the latter
>>>     doesn't have the concept of every dir being a repo in and of itself.
>>>     This means if we simply pushed everything to a giant github repo, that
>>>     would not be terribly useful (definitely not a replacement for CGRAN),
>>>     although I can see that being a temp solution so that at the very least,
>>>     nothing is lost (a big advantage of using github is that they're less
>>>     likely to lose data).
>>>
>>>     Really, every CGRAN project should be pulled into it's own little repo,
>>>     e.g. on github. Migrating from SVN to git is really easy (even with
>>>     preserving history and all). I guess we could put up instructions on 
>>> how to
>>>     do that if there's popular demand.
>>>
>>>     However, there's also the wiki pages on CGRAN. We do need a strategy for
>>>     those (and a way to access them).
>>>
>>>     Keep the ideas and comments coming, people!
>>>
>>>     Cheers,
>>>
>>>     M
>>>
>>>     _______________________________________________
>>>     Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
>>>     address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden>
>>>     https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
>>>
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
>>     address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden>
>>     https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
> 
> 
>     _______________________________________________
>     Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
>     address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden>
>     https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
>