[GenABEL-dev] Proposal to move to Github
K. Zhong
k.zhong at erasmusmc.nl
Mon Oct 19 23:12:30 CEST 2015
You can register for a 5-user team for free on bitbucket.
Best regards,
Kaiyin ZHONG
------------------
FMB, Erasmus MC
http://kspace.co.vu
k.zhong at erasmusmc.nl
kindlychung at gmail.com
On 19/10/2015 23:09, "genabel-devel-bounces at lists.r-forge.r-project.org on
behalf of L.C. Karssen" <genabel-devel-bounces at lists.r-forge.r-project.org
on behalf of lennart at karssen.org> wrote:
>Hmm, am I correct that Github allows you to create an 'organisation',
>but Bitbucket doesn't?
>I just the GenABEL Project on Github [1] some time ago. Bitbucket seems
>to have teams, which could work the same way, but if I understand it
>correctly you need to pay for teams with more than 5 members. That would
>be a definite plus for GitHub.
>
>
>Lennart.
>
>
>
>[1] https://github.com/GenABEL-Project
>
>On 19-10-15 22:43, L.C. Karssen wrote:
>> hi Kaiyin,
>>
>> On 19-10-15 22:28, K. Zhong wrote:
>>> Hi, Lennart.
>>>
>>> Regarding to (2), it¹s possible to start in Bitbucket and then create a
>>> mirror in Github painlessly (or vice-versa).
>>
>> Interesting! I didn't think of that. Thanks for bringing it up.
>>
>> I do think that for 'communication' purposes it wouldbe best to have one
>> 'main/official location' for the packages (either Github or Bitbucket),
>> to keep possible confusion to a minimum. Now (almost) all development is
>> done on R-forge's SVN. Nice and clean. Given Git's improvements to the
>> development process and the fact that Github/Bitucket give a push
>> towards social coding I have no objections to have both R-forge and a
>> Git repo, but IMHO spreading packages across three platforms doesn't
>> sound very good.
>>
>>> But for published packages a
>>> private repo seems unnecessary?
>>
>> True. I thought maybe a private repo could be used by packages that are
>> still under consideration. Or where the authors are not ready yet to
>> develop 'in broad daylight' yet. Not really in the GenABEL spirit, but
>> we could be open to that.
>>
>>
>> Lennart.
>>
>>> My 2 cents.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Kaiyin ZHONG
>>> ------------------
>>> FMB, Erasmus MC
>>> http://kaiyin.co.vu
>>> k.zhong at erasmusmc.nl
>>> kindlychung at gmail.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 19/10/2015 22:20,
>>>"genabel-devel-bounces at lists.r-forge.r-project.org on
>>> behalf of L.C. Karssen"
>>><genabel-devel-bounces at lists.r-forge.r-project.org
>>> on behalf of lennart at karssen.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dear list,
>>>>
>>>> With this e-mail I'm digging up a conversation from the past
>>>>(April/May
>>>> 2014). Back then we discussed (see below) the idea of moving (some of)
>>>> the GenABEL suite tools to a Git repository like GitHub.
>>>>
>>>> Since then I have gained more experience with Git and I love it. So
>>>>I'm
>>>> all for giving it a try. This brings up the following questions on
>>>>which
>>>> I'd like to hear your opinion:
>>>>
>>>> 1) Which package(s) do we migrate first?
>>>>
>>>> 2) Where do we migrate to?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regarding 1): I think OmicABEL and OmicABELnoMM are the easiest to
>>>>start
>>>> with. They have a linear history (no branches etc.) so conversion is
>>>> straightforward. I'd love to migrate ProbABEL, but I've spent several
>>>> hours in vain trying to keep the branches and history correct. More
>>>>time
>>>> needed there (if someone has experience in SVN -> Git migration,
>>>>please
>>>> let me know).
>>>>
>>>> Regarding 2): Either GitHub or BitBucket is an option for me. I have
>>>> some experience with both. Github is more popular/the de facto
>>>>standard,
>>>> but the nice thing about Bitbucket is that it allows private
>>>> repositories (for up to 5 collaborators) also in their free plan. Not
>>>> sure if this is of any use for GenABEL.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Once we reach agreement on 1 and 2 I volunteer to do the migration.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>> Lennart.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 02-05-14 10:27, Yurii Aulchenko wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 12:25 AM, Diego Fabregat
>>>>> <fabregat at aices.rwth-aachen.de
>>>>><mailto:fabregat at aices.rwth-aachen.de>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I like the idea of moving to git. I have no experience with
>>>>>github,
>>>>> but I'm using git on an almost daily basis (we have our own git
>>>>> server in our group for code and papers). I would have no
>>>>>problem in
>>>>> uploading OmicABEL to a git repo.
>>>>>
>>>>> Does dropping R-forge have a (bad) impact on the visibility of
>>>>>the
>>>>> project or on the user experience (e.g., installation of R
>>>>> packages)?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> In my opinion - not really (visibility: I do not think we get many
>>>>>users
>>>>> because they've found us at r-forge; also we can keep the account and
>>>>> make links from there; as for installation, the argument partly holds
>>>>> only for R-packages). What we need to think is of course how we
>>>>> keep/move all parts such as a) code b) trackers c) project docs such
>>>>>as
>>>>> code guidelines
>>>>>
>>>>> To me it seems that the idea to migrate few packages first is the
>>>>>most
>>>>> reasonable; few are likely to stay at r-forge for long
>>>>>
>>>>> Yurii
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 04/28/2014 10:09 PM, L.C. Karssen wrote:
>>>>>> Dear Maarten, dear all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Moving to github... Hmm... That is quite a decision, so I've
>>>>>> renamed the
>>>>>> subject to better reflect the discussion. I've also dropped the
>>>>>> older
>>>>>> e-mails from the bottom of the thread.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> First off, are there any people that have experience with git
>>>>>> and/or
>>>>>> github? I've got some git experience (still learning), but no
>>>>>>real
>>>>>> experience with github.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree with Maarten that SVN is showing its age. As he
>>>>>>indicates
>>>>>> things
>>>>>> like branching are much easier in git. Moreover, since I'm
>>>>>> travelling
>>>>>> regularly being able to work without internet connection is a
>>>>>>pro.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On the other hand, moving to git (whether github or elsewhere)
>>>>>> means
>>>>>> leaving R-forge, which is our well-known infrastructure.
>>>>>> Furthermore,
>>>>>> such a move operation will cost quite some time, I guess. Moving
>>>>>> all
>>>>>> bugs, features, etc... If we decide to move we should plan well
>>>>>> and not
>>>>>> rush. And then the current developers will need to learn git if
>>>>>> they
>>>>>> don't already know how to use it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One thing I think we should definitely do is migrate slowly,
>>>>>> package by
>>>>>> package. Given that Maarten is positive about such a move and
>>>>>>that
>>>>>> I am
>>>>>> in a bit of limbo but not fully against, it seems logical that
>>>>>> ProbABEL
>>>>>> is the first package to try such a migration.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Looking forward to your comments!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lennart.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 28-04-14 20:39, Maarten Kooyman wrote:
>>>>>>> Dear all,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think it is easier to use for code review github:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please check to get a impression
>>>>>>> :https://github.com/jquery/jquery/pull/1241/files
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think we should reconsider an other the software version
>>>>>>> system: the
>>>>>>> current system is not up to date to current usability. Bug
>>>>>>> tracking and
>>>>>>> branching is quite hard in terms of usability. Please have a
>>>>>>>look
>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>> github.com <http://github.com> to get a impression what is
>>>>>>> possible.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Maarten
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
>>>>>> L.C. Karssen
>>>>>> Utrecht
>>>>>> The Netherlands
>>>>>>
>>>>>> lennart at karssen.org <mailto:lennart at karssen.org>
>>>>>> http://blog.karssen.org
>>>>>> GPG key ID: A88F554A
>>>>>> -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> genabel-devel mailing list
>>>>>> genabel-devel at lists.r-forge.r-project.org
>>>>>> <mailto:genabel-devel at lists.r-forge.r-project.org>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>https://lists.r-forge.r-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/genabel-
>>>>>>dev
>>>>>> el
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> genabel-devel mailing list
>>>>> genabel-devel at lists.r-forge.r-project.org
>>>>> <mailto:genabel-devel at lists.r-forge.r-project.org>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>https://lists.r-forge.r-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/genabel-d
>>>>>eve
>>>>> l
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> -----------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Yurii S. Aulchenko
>>>>>
>>>>> [ LinkedIn <http://nl.linkedin.com/in/yuriiaulchenko> ] [ Twitter
>>>>> <http://twitter.com/YuriiAulchenko> ] [ Blog
>>>>> <http://yurii-aulchenko.blogspot.nl/> ]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> genabel-devel mailing list
>>>>> genabel-devel at lists.r-forge.r-project.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>https://lists.r-forge.r-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/genabel-d
>>>>>eve
>>>>> l
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
>>>> L.C. Karssen
>>>> Utrecht
>>>> The Netherlands
>>>>
>>>> lennart at karssen.org
>>>> http://blog.karssen.org
>>>> GPG key ID: A88F554A
>>>> -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> genabel-devel mailing list
>>> genabel-devel at lists.r-forge.r-project.org
>>>
>>>https://lists.r-forge.r-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/genabel-dev
>>>el
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> genabel-devel mailing list
>> genabel-devel at lists.r-forge.r-project.org
>>
>>https://lists.r-forge.r-project.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/genabel-deve
>>l
>>
>
>--
>*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
>L.C. Karssen
>Utrecht
>The Netherlands
>
>lennart at karssen.org
>http://blog.karssen.org
>GPG key ID: A88F554A
>-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
>
More information about the genabel-devel
mailing list