Apache OpenOffice Github repository has 2 open "pull" requests

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Apache OpenOffice Github repository has 2 open "pull" requests

Peter Kovacs-3
Hi all,


I am a bit confused about the 2 pull request. They both seem to try to
merge changes via git into the Git Repo.

One is a portugese Language change.

The other one is a Merge request for 3.4


We should reject them or something. At least for the Language merge
request I have set a comment that, we use pootle.

(Hope that the answer is correct.)

What about the idea moving to git? I think we had posponet the desicion
after 4.1.4 which is releaed by now.


All the best

Peter


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Apache OpenOffice Github repository has 2 open "pull" requests

Marcus (OOo)
Am 07.11.2017 um 09:57 schrieb Peter Kovacs:

> I am a bit confused about the 2 pull request. They both seem to try to
> merge changes via git into the Git Repo.
>
> One is a portugese Language change.
>
> The other one is a Merge request for 3.4
>
>
> We should reject them or something. At least for the Language merge
> request I have set a comment that, we use pootle.
>
> (Hope that the answer is correct.)

yes, we should not accept any changes in GIT as it is just another
format to get the source. But its origin is in SVN.

Marcus


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Apache OpenOffice Github repository has 2 open "pull" requests

Andrea Pescetti-2
Marcus wrote:
> Am 07.11.2017 um 09:57 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>> I am a bit confused about the 2 pull request. They both seem to try to
>> merge changes via git into the Git Repo.

So this would be https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pulls - both of
them are not useful. One is badly written, the other one seems to be a
merge from the AOO34 branch to trunk which doesn't make sense.

Can we disable this feature? My preference would be for killing the
Github broken mirror entirely, but at least let's disable pull requests.
I'll let this float here for lazy consensus and then be in contact with
Infra (and ask to disable pull requests) if nobody opposes.

>> One is a portugese Language change.

Actually it is a broken attempt into supporting an additional variant of
Spanish.

>> The other one is a Merge request for 3.4

It's FROM the AOO34 branch, and thus useless. There is no original code
at all.

>> We should reject them or something. At least for the Language merge
>> request I have set a comment that, we use pootle.
>> (Hope that the answer is correct.)

Your answer is not correct. Pootle only applies to existing languages.
The starting point for a new language would be
https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Adding_a_new_language_or_locale (very
outdated, but if you ask the person to contact our l10n mailing list we
can provide guidance). His attempt at doing it in code is broken, so the
merge request itself is irrelevant.

> yes, we should not accept any changes in GIT as it is just another
> format to get the source. But its origin is in SVN.

Just to be clear, Github and GIT are not the same thing. The issue here
is not whether we use SVN or GIT for our official repository (this is a
separate discussion), but whether we support the unofficial mirror on
Github that was requested by nobody, lags behind, advertises fake
releases, publishes incorrect statistics and -as Peter discovered now-
also provides the fake expectation that we can accept pull requests
through it. If Infra really wants to keep it alive, we should put a
disclaimer on it.

Regards,
   Andrea.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Apache OpenOffice Github repository has 2 open "pull" requests

Peter Kovacs-3
Long story short.
I agree switching the read only got repository off if we at the same time switch to git.

In other cases I would like to check first if I can switch my github OpenOffice repo  to the svn first.
I use my repo ( or more plan to) share my development code between all my machines.
Hopefully I can do this on the weekend.

At a minimum we should maintain the read only repo more actively. Since use it, I would volunteer as a maintainer if we decide to keep it.


Am 7. November 2017 21:55:24 MEZ schrieb Andrea Pescetti <[hidden email]>:

>Marcus wrote:
>> Am 07.11.2017 um 09:57 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>> I am a bit confused about the 2 pull request. They both seem to try
>to
>>> merge changes via git into the Git Repo.
>
>So this would be https://github.com/apache/openoffice/pulls - both of
>them are not useful. One is badly written, the other one seems to be a
>merge from the AOO34 branch to trunk which doesn't make sense.
>
>Can we disable this feature? My preference would be for killing the
>Github broken mirror entirely, but at least let's disable pull
>requests.
>I'll let this float here for lazy consensus and then be in contact with
>
>Infra (and ask to disable pull requests) if nobody opposes.
>
>>> One is a portugese Language change.
>
>Actually it is a broken attempt into supporting an additional variant
>of
>Spanish.
>
>>> The other one is a Merge request for 3.4
>
>It's FROM the AOO34 branch, and thus useless. There is no original code
>
>at all.
>
>>> We should reject them or something. At least for the Language merge
>>> request I have set a comment that, we use pootle.
>>> (Hope that the answer is correct.)
>
>Your answer is not correct. Pootle only applies to existing languages.
>The starting point for a new language would be
>https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Adding_a_new_language_or_locale (very
>outdated, but if you ask the person to contact our l10n mailing list we
>
>can provide guidance). His attempt at doing it in code is broken, so
>the
>merge request itself is irrelevant.
>
>> yes, we should not accept any changes in GIT as it is just another
>> format to get the source. But its origin is in SVN.
>
>Just to be clear, Github and GIT are not the same thing. The issue here
>
>is not whether we use SVN or GIT for our official repository (this is a
>
>separate discussion), but whether we support the unofficial mirror on
>Github that was requested by nobody, lags behind, advertises fake
>releases, publishes incorrect statistics and -as Peter discovered now-
>also provides the fake expectation that we can accept pull requests
>through it. If Infra really wants to keep it alive, we should put a
>disclaimer on it.
>
>Regards,
>   Andrea.
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]