We recently moved flink-shaded to GitBox; overall I'm quite happy with
how it works.
However, it is not possible for committers to push commits that haven't
gone through the github/asf
account linking process (https://gitbox.apache.org/setup/).
I verified this today in an experiment with the help of Robert.
The linking process requires every committer to join the ASF github
organization, include their github username
in the apache profile, and setup 2-factor-authorization for their github
account.
While i would love to have the gitbox functionality for the Flink
repository I don't know whether we want to
impose these requirements on all committers.
On 21.06.2017 19:49, Robert Metzger wrote:
+1 for trying out Gitbox!
On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 6:50 PM, Greg Hogan <c...@greghogan.com> wrote:
My understanding is that with GitBox project committers who have linked
Apache and GitHub accounts are given organization write permissions. Other
contributors will continue to have read permissions.
https://help.github.com/articles/repository-permission-levels-for-an-
organization/
The last comment noting the “split-brain” shouldn’t preclude the use of
GitBox but we should come to a general consensus before switching to commit
into the GitHub repo.
If we want to try GitHub for flink-web, a second step could to switch and
use with the nascent flink-libraries.
On Jun 18, 2017, at 6:50 AM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org>
wrote:
Found some info in this JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/
jira/browse/INFRA-14191
Apparently, Gitbox is still in the beta phase. There are no public docs
for it yet.
Committers are required to link their apache & GitHub accounts, which
requires 2FA on GitHub.
As it stands I would be in favor of Gregs original suggestion of
activating it for flink-web as a test bed.
I would wait with the main repo until we actually have more info and it
is a bit more proven.
On 11.06.2017 19:37, Ufuk Celebi wrote:
I would also like to see this happening for both flink-web and flink
if it allows committers to have control over the respective repos.
On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 4:05 PM, Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org>
wrote:
What are the downsides of this? Actually, is there any ASF resource
that
outlines what this would enable?
In one of the threads i saw said that this would also allow committers
to
close PR's, assign labels and such.
This sounds very interesting to me for the main repo actually.
On 09.06.2017 17:41, Greg Hogan wrote:
Robert has an open PR from March. I’ve found, for example, PRs adding
links to talks or slides left open for months.
I’d suggest Fluo is to Accumulo as flink-web is to the flink repo, and
that migration looks to be satisfactory.
On Jun 9, 2017, at 11:15 AM, Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> wrote:
bq. better track the oft-neglected contributions
Do you have estimate on how many contributions were not paid
attention in
the current infrastructure.
Looking at #2, it seems Accumulo community hasn't reached consensus
yet.
Cheers
On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 7:54 AM, Greg Hogan <c...@greghogan.com>
wrote:
All,
ASF now has available (and maybe mandatory for new projects or
repos)
GitBox [0] which enables bi-directional sync to GitHub and links
committers' accounts, allowing for greater use of GitHub
functionality
by
contributors and for committers to perform many tasks otherwise
requiring
INFRA tickets.
I'd like to propose moving flink-web [1] to GitBox, using GitHub
issues,
and enabling notifications to the mailing lists. Apache Accumulo has
recently discussed [2] this topic with a list of benefits after
migrating
Fluo. By migrating flink-web we can better track the oft-neglected
contributions and also test the waters for future migrations
(perhaps
for
the future sub-projects).
[0] https://gitbox.apache.org/
[1] https://github.com/apache/flink-web/pulls
[2]
http://apache-accumulo.1065345.n5.nabble.com/DISCUSS-
GitBox-tp21160p21497.html
Greg
