Agreed, the history of the web site is not very important. Julian
> On Feb 15, 2019, at 5:58 AM, Michael Mior <[email protected]> wrote: > > I think we may want to keep the old SVN repository around if this is > the case, but I personally don't have a problem with losing history in > the new git repo. On a related note, it would be good to find a > process for the new repo that can work with a shallow clone so we > don't have to have the entire history of the site to push a change. > > -- > Michael Mior > [email protected] > > Le ven. 15 févr. 2019 à 05:29, Francis Chuang > <[email protected]> a écrit : >> >> Hey everyone, >> >> I have now created the calcite-site repo in Gitbox. It is now available >> via Github and the Gitbox endpoint, but currently empty. >> >> I am currently trying to migrate the svn repo, but it is taking a very >> long time and eventually timed out for me. A member of the ASF infra >> team has also confirmed that it can take hours or days to complete [1]. >> >> I feel that it would probably be easier if we just copy the existing >> files from the svn repo and make that the first commit in the git repo. >> This is what Kafka did for their migration [2]. >> >> How important are the commits for site pushes? In my opinion it's >> probably acceptable if we lose them and start anew with the git repo as >> they do not document changes to our code base. >> >> Happy to hear your thoughts! >> >> Francis >> >> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-17846 >> [2] >> https://github.com/apache/kafka-site/commit/ba6c994ca09629b047ab9175f882877ba03b92da >> >>> On 11/02/2019 9:00 pm, Francis Chuang wrote: >>> Hey all, >>> >>> ASF project sites have the ability to use git instead of subversion as >>> their repository for web site content [1]. It has been available since >>> 2015 and appears to be quite stable. Quite a few other projects have >>> also moved their websites to git and subsequently, Gitbox (for using >>> Github as their source of truth. As an example, see the Arrow project [2]. >>> >>> I myself would love to see this as I find gits interface and ux to be >>> much easier to use compared to svn. It also reduces the need to context >>> switch between Git and svn when editing and pushing the site. >>> >>> My overall goal is to find a way to automate the publishing and build of >>> our websites either via Jenkins builds (there are some projects are >>> doing this already when I searched infra) or the new Github actions [3]. >>> Having the site hosted in Git would make this process much easier to >>> automate. I will need to get in touch with infra to clarify a few things >>> and to see if this is feasible, but I think this is a worthwhile endeavor. >>> >>> How do you guys feel about moving our site's repository from svn to GitBox? >>> >>> Francis >>> >>> >>> [1] https://blogs.apache.org/infra/entry/git_based_websites_available >>> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-17655 >>> [3] https://github.com/features/actions >>
