On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 4:38 PM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 21 March 2016 at 20:32, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: >> I do, but I'm still unclear on dealing w/ the GH workflow. >> >> Can I just do it via svn, or even *our* git and not deal >> w/ GH at all?
You can do it entirely using *our* git and not deal with GH at all. > You can certainly just work on a clone of our Git; no need to use > GitHub (once you are set up correctly). Nothing needs to be set up to use our git: https://git-dual.apache.org/repos/asf/whimsy.git Pushes there are automatically picked up. I've done it. Jim, perhaps you could try pushing a minor change to README.md and letting us know how it works out? - Sam Ruby >>> On Mar 21, 2016, at 4:19 PM, Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net> wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 3:14 PM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: >>>> Well, it looks like the format has been changing... so I >>>> can see concerns. >>>> >>>> But really, I'm not sure why it needs to be so >>>> "standardized" esp when it's mucking around with >>>> stuff it has no reason to. It's adding a line, so >>>> I don't see the reason why it has to "recreate" the >>>> file in the 1st place. Either it finds where a new >>>> proxy needs to go and adds it there, or find the >>>> line that needs to be updated, and modified *that* >>>> line, or it finds the line it needs to delete >>>> and trashes it. >>>> >>>> If a tool is updating a file which is also mostly edited >>>> by humans, it should be pretty lax about enforcing >>>> a "format" imo. If it doesn't need to mess with >>>> a line, it should leave it alone or output it >>>> exactly as it was read... >>> >>> Originally, this was a sorted index of files in the associated >>> proxies-received directory. >>> >>> I'm OK with the idea of requirements changing and/or this being a bug >>> in the first place. >>> >>> None of us like the idea of single maintainer tools. In this case, >>> what we have here is a small, standalone tool. After the dust settles >>> (i.e., after the meeting is over), anybody want to take a crack at >>> improving it? >>> >>> Note: improving it could mean rewriting in Python and moving to Steve, >>> I don't care. What I do care about is having multiple maintainers. >>> >>> - Sam Ruby >>> >>>>> On Mar 21, 2016, at 3:02 PM, Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I think having a proxy web interface continues to be a good idea; but we >>>>> need to come to a common understanding of the data format. Too late for >>>>> this meeting, but I'm inclined to change to a JSON format for future >>>>> meetings. >>>>> >>>>> Here's the relevant lines: >>>>> >>>>> https://github.com/apache/whimsy/blob/c5329abf90371ff2377bcb6f087abb59605bcea4/www/members/proxy.cgi#L163 >>>>> >>>>> Most importantly, lines that do NOT match / \S.*\(\S+\)$/ are lost. >>>>> >>>>> This is clearly problematic. >>>>> >>>>> Suggestions welcome! >>>>> >>>>> - Sam Ruby >>
