On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 1:46 AM John H Palmieri <jhpalmier...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Sunday, September 18, 2022 at 2:55:34 PM UTC-7 dim...@gmail.com wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sun, 18 Sep 2022, 22:44 John H Palmieri, <jhpalm...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> William, this is exactly why I search in the sage-trac Google group rather >>> than on the trac website. >> >> >> it's looks easy to set up posting of issues/comments to a google group.
one way is to use GitHub Actions - used by us for testing branches, but they can also be triggered by issues/comments: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issue_comment >> >>> The sage-trac group is also good for browsing to see recent activity. >> >> >> for recent activities there are GitHub tools, probably more suitable for >> such a tack. > > > Great! Is there any information on this on the migration plan? I didn't see > anything at a quick glance. These are called GitHub notifications: https://docs.github.com/en/account-and-profile/managing-subscriptions-and-notifications-on-github/setting-up-notifications/about-notifications they are web-based. They can be emailed too, integrated with desktop, etc. > >> >>> >>> On Sunday, September 18, 2022 at 11:12:59 AM UTC-7 wst...@gmail.com wrote: >>>> >>>> On Sun, Sep 18, 2022 at 10:27 AM Matthias Koeppe >>>> <matthia...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> > >>>> > On Sunday, September 18, 2022 at 10:14:26 AM UTC-7 Nils Bruin wrote: >>>> >> >>>> >> On Saturday, 17 September 2022 at 17:55:10 UTC-7 Matthias Koeppe wrote: >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> The conversion of the Trac tickets to GitHub Issues/PRs only works in >>>> >>> one shot. Incrementally syncing updates from Trac to existing issues >>>> >>> is not possible. >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> Migration *to* GH is one thing, but as has been pointed out, we should >>>> >> have an exit strategy as well, or at least an idea of a roadmap to move >>>> >> from github to elsewhere. The code itself is trivial to move: it's a >>>> >> git repo. However, as has been shown in the past, the discussions (now >>>> >> in tickets on trac, but if moved in issues and PRs) can sometimes be of >>>> >> immense value as well. I suppose that if moving from GH to GL is as >>>> >> trivial as claimed before, GH must have a way of exporting issues and >>>> >> PRs. >>>> >> >>>> >> Would someone be able to give an informed assessment or a feasibility >>>> >> study of extracting issues and PRs from GH? How searchable are they and >>>> >> how do cross-links survive an extraction (also important for >>>> >> trac-to-GH)? Presently, trac is fairly searchable due to its own search >>>> >> functions plus its general indexing by google's search engine. >>>> >> Hopefully we'd have something at least matching that for GH. >>>> >> >>>> >> Perhaps part of our setup should also be that we "backup" this part of >>>> >> our github setup: githubs own infrastructure is of course excellently >>>> >> resilient against technological problems but a new failure mode is >>>> >> introduced due to their governance and policy: in the extremely >>>> >> unlikely event that sagemath on GH would get "locked" due to a >>>> >> misunderstanding (or malice?) we might not be at their mercy for >>>> >> extracting our valuable history. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > I agree that it would be valuable to add at least some starting points >>>> > in this direction. >>>> > As a beginning, I have created the section: >>>> > https://github.com/sagemath/sage/wiki/migration-from-trac-to-Git**b#retrieving-data-from-github >>>> > to include the link https://docs.github.com/en/rest to GitHub's REST >>>> > API, which gives access to everything and is extremely well documented. >>>> >>>> I used this GitHub REST API a lot recently to implement proxying of >>>> content from GitHub to CoCalc, and it is indeed *extremely* good. >>>> >>>> This is a 3 minute video demoing importing github repos to gitlab, >>>> which emphasizes answers to a lot of natural frequent questions >>>> (involving users, issue comments, labels, etc.): >>>> >>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYOXuOg9tQI >>>> >>>> In my experience, the search built into GitHub is at least 10x (or >>>> maybe 100x?) faster than our trac search, e.g., try searching >>>> https://trac.sagemath.org/search versus >>>> https://github.com/python/cpython/issues . In addition GitHub's >>>> advanced search capabilities are useful (in terms of sorting, refining >>>> queries, querying by label, etc.). >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> William (http://wstein.org) >>> >>> -- >>> >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "sage-devel" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >>> email to sage-devel+...@googlegroups.com. >>> >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/02f5020e-7c69-4be3-a277-cf5b47fb635bn%40googlegroups.com. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "sage-devel" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/d2532c0b-528c-4bfb-a1d6-160cfb3671d5n%40googlegroups.com. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/CAAWYfq2Sfy3TNn7uFxgKNq8-gDRR%2B11F_HsDbJHzpoFB8vmByg%40mail.gmail.com.
