git-svn matplotlib mirror

Hi,

I want to set up a git mirror for matplotlib, but I 1) have some minor
problems and 2) want to know what others think about this.

I'm a native git user and I don't know how to use svn properly. So I
try everything to avoid svn. Furthermore, I like git so much that I
don't want to give it up when developing for matplotlib.

As is well-known, there *is* already a git mirror for mpl, using
svnmerge.py, i.e., http://github.com/astraw/matplotlib. Anyway, this
repo seems to be not actively maintained for monthes. The last comit
on branch trunk is from Nov 12, 2010.

Yesterday I tried git-svn on the matplotlib sf repo, and it took quite
a long time (already ~500 MB), but it stopped with some error message:
RA layer request failed: REPORT of
'/svnroot/matplotlib/!svn/vcc/default': SSL negotiation failed:
Connection reset by peer (https://matplotlib.svn.sourceforge.net) at
/usr/local/libexec/git-core/git-svn line 5061

I could imagine the sf server treated me as some DoS user.

I attach a part of the log of how I initialised the git repo (without
the middle part), and also some tees of $git branch -a and $git log
trunk | head -n 150.

I realised that I used different options to git svn init (i.e., I used
--std-layout) than stated on
http://matplotlib.sourceforge.net/devel/coding_guide.html#using-git,
but I cannot see why I should use --trunk=trunk/matplotlib
--prefix=svn/. From the logs of $git svn fetch, it looks good.

If there is no feedback until today eve here in Germany (in ~6 hrs),
I'll try again today evening to $git svn fetch some more of the repo.
If there is positive feedback, I'll consider writing to the github
guys to give me ~2 Gigs of storage for the mirror. If there is
negative feedback, I'll consider giving the project up. Note, that it
is inevitable for me to publish the mirror when Ben and I want to use
it (for some project we have since a few monthes on mpl).

I would suggest to always put git changes *on top* of svn changes, so
no use of $git merge trunk, but always $git rebase. This is the only
way to make usable diffs which can go in into svn on sf as far as I
can see.

There is a general problem which will pertain all git users: Once the
changes went via svn into the sf repo, they reappear on the github
mirror, causing conflicts in the branches on github where they
originally came from. The solution to this would be clear, but I
think there will be no way to get a consensus to switch from svn to
git on mpl completely.

Friedrich

01.git-svn-fetch.part.log (6.89 KB)

01.git-branch-a.log (1.3 KB)

02.git-log-trunk.part.log (5.53 KB)

Hi,

I want to set up a git mirror for matplotlib, but I 1) have some minor
problems and 2) want to know what others think about this.

Late last year, I did some work to convert the svn repository to git.
The code to d the conversion is available at
https://github.com/darrendale/mpl2git . The resulting git repo is
available at https://github.com/darrendale/matplotlib . I have not
pursued the project further because there did not seem to be enough
interest in migrating from svn/sourceforge to git/github to justify
investing more of my time in the project.

I'm a native git user and I don't know how to use svn properly.

I read that as "uninterested in learning how to use svn", and such
sentiment is probably a fact of life as many (most?) open source
projects move to DVC. In my opinion, matplotlib is likely to draw more
contributors if it lowers barriers to entry and uses a DVCS that is
growing in popularity, like git/github.

Darren

···

On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 9:09 AM, Friedrich Romstedt <friedrichromstedt@...149...> wrote:

In discussions with Ryan May on the prospect of switching over to git, it sounds like we have a “Bike Shed” problem where we (the main developers) agree that we agree that a bike shed should be built, but we can’t agree on the color to paint it…

I think the main source of the huge download size is the data that is coming from the basemap toolkit. I do not think that it would be a good thing to have everyone and their mother needing to do a ‘git clone’ on their computer and find they have to pull down 500+ MB of stuff to get matplotlib. It is because of this that a straight-forward migration from svn to matplotlib won’t be possible.

What have been the proposed solutions to dealing with basemap’s data?

Ben Root

···

On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 10:26 AM, Darren Dale <dsdale24@…714…> wrote:

On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 9:09 AM, Friedrich Romstedt > > <friedrichromstedt@…716…> wrote:

Hi,

I want to set up a git mirror for matplotlib, but I 1) have some minor

problems and 2) want to know what others think about this.

Late last year, I did some work to convert the svn repository to git.

The code to d the conversion is available at

https://github.com/darrendale/mpl2git . The resulting git repo is

available at https://github.com/darrendale/matplotlib . I have not

pursued the project further because there did not seem to be enough

interest in migrating from svn/sourceforge to git/github to justify

investing more of my time in the project.

I’m a native git user and I don’t know how to use svn properly.

I read that as “uninterested in learning how to use svn”, and such

sentiment is probably a fact of life as many (most?) open source

projects move to DVC. In my opinion, matplotlib is likely to draw more

contributors if it lowers barriers to entry and uses a DVCS that is

growing in popularity, like git/github.

Darren

> Hi,
>
> I want to set up a git mirror for matplotlib, but I 1) have some minor
> problems and 2) want to know what others think about this.

Late last year, I did some work to convert the svn repository to git.
The code to d the conversion is available at
https://github.com/darrendale/mpl2git . The resulting git repo is
available at https://github.com/darrendale/matplotlib . I have not
pursued the project further because there did not seem to be enough
interest in migrating from svn/sourceforge to git/github to justify
investing more of my time in the project.

> I'm a native git user and I don't know how to use svn properly.

I read that as "uninterested in learning how to use svn", and such
sentiment is probably a fact of life as many (most?) open source
projects move to DVC. In my opinion, matplotlib is likely to draw more
contributors if it lowers barriers to entry and uses a DVCS that is
growing in popularity, like git/github.

Darren

In discussions with Ryan May on the prospect of switching over to git, it
sounds like we have a "Bike Shed" problem where we (the main developers)
agree that we agree that a bike shed should be built, but we can't agree on
the color to paint it...

In my view, the issue has nothing to do with bikeshedding.

I think the main source of the huge download size is the data that is coming
from the basemap toolkit. I do not think that it would be a good thing to
have everyone and their mother needing to do a 'git clone' on their computer
and find they have to pull down 500+ MB of stuff to get matplotlib. It is
because of this that a straight-forward migration from svn to matplotlib
won't be possible.

The git repo at https://github.com/darrendale/matplotlib does not
include anything from basemap.

What have been the proposed solutions to dealing with basemap's data?

Separate repo?

···

On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Benjamin Root <ben.root@...553...> wrote:

On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 10:26 AM, Darren Dale <dsdale24@...149...> wrote:

On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 9:09 AM, Friedrich Romstedt >> <friedrichromstedt@...149...> wrote:

+1. There have been several times I've wanted to fix something in the documentation, and would have via github if it had been available. As it was, I sent an email to the list and someone else did it for me. In my case, the fixes got in, but it took more time and effort for me and presumably also for the people making the fix (compared to just responding to a pull request, for example). I do remember debating whether it was worth the trouble to report the typo when I realized I had to send an email describing exactly where the typo was.

Thanks,

Jason

···

On 1/22/11 10:26 AM, Darren Dale wrote:

On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 9:09 AM, Friedrich Romstedt > <friedrichromstedt@...149...> wrote:

Hi,

I want to set up a git mirror for matplotlib, but I 1) have some minor
problems and 2) want to know what others think about this.

Late last year, I did some work to convert the svn repository to git.
The code to d the conversion is available at
https://github.com/darrendale/mpl2git . The resulting git repo is
available at https://github.com/darrendale/matplotlib . I have not
pursued the project further because there did not seem to be enough
interest in migrating from svn/sourceforge to git/github to justify
investing more of my time in the project.

I'm a native git user and I don't know how to use svn properly.

I read that as "uninterested in learning how to use svn", and such
sentiment is probably a fact of life as many (most?) open source
projects move to DVC. In my opinion, matplotlib is likely to draw more
contributors if it lowers barriers to entry and uses a DVCS that is
growing in popularity, like git/github.

Hi,

I want to set up a git mirror for matplotlib, but I 1) have some minor
problems and 2) want to know what others think about this.

Late last year, I did some work to convert the svn repository to git.
The code to d the conversion is available at
https://github.com/darrendale/mpl2git . The resulting git repo is
available at https://github.com/darrendale/matplotlib . I have not
pursued the project further because there did not seem to be enough
interest in migrating from svn/sourceforge to git/github to justify
investing more of my time in the project.

I'm a native git user and I don't know how to use svn properly.

I read that as "uninterested in learning how to use svn", and such
sentiment is probably a fact of life as many (most?) open source
projects move to DVC. In my opinion, matplotlib is likely to draw more
contributors if it lowers barriers to entry and uses a DVCS that is
growing in popularity, like git/github.

Darren

In discussions with Ryan May on the prospect of switching over to git, it
sounds like we have a "Bike Shed" problem where we (the main developers)
agree that we agree that a bike shed should be built, but we can't agree on
the color to paint it...

In my view, the issue has nothing to do with bikeshedding.

Agreed. We *did* agree to move to git, and the only problem was that most of us lack the expertise and time to be of much help in actually getting it done. I think there was a bit of a hangup over the question of migrating the bug tracking; but I suspect we could agree that this is a secondary question, and that any such migration, if desired, can be done at leisure *after* taking the primary step of switching the code repo.

I think the main source of the huge download size is the data that is coming
from the basemap toolkit. I do not think that it would be a good thing to
have everyone and their mother needing to do a 'git clone' on their computer
and find they have to pull down 500+ MB of stuff to get matplotlib. It is
because of this that a straight-forward migration from svn to matplotlib
won't be possible.

The git repo at https://github.com/darrendale/matplotlib does not
include anything from basemap.

The key point being that you are converting matplotlib/trunk/matplotlib,
not matplotlib/trunk; the latter is what includes py4science, toolkits (including basemap), sample_data, etc. I think this is the right approach.

This doesn't all have to be perfect; it just has to be good enough. I suspect your conversion is good enough. If you are reasonably confident, then I think that if you go ahead and set up a github repo as the new official source tree, along with posting whatever notices are needed for anyone accessing the svn tree, the active developers will say "thank you!", and it will be done.

The other person who has been most interested in the nuts and bolts of the conversion is Andrew Straw. Although he is evidently very short of mpl time these days, you might want to try to contact him directly to see if he has thought of anything you might have overlooked.

I would like to be included in the group with git write access, unless there is a clear decision to restrict this group to a very small core of gatekeepers.

Eric

···

On 01/22/2011 07:06 AM, Darren Dale wrote:

On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Benjamin Root<ben.root@...553...> wrote:

On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 10:26 AM, Darren Dale<dsdale24@...149...> wrote:

On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 9:09 AM, Friedrich Romstedt >>> <friedrichromstedt@...149...> wrote:

What have been the proposed solutions to dealing with basemap's data?

Separate repo?

2011/1/22 Eric Firing <efiring@...229...>:

This doesn't all have to be perfect; it just has to be good enough. I
suspect your conversion is good enough. If you are reasonably
confident, then I think that if you go ahead and set up a github repo as
the new official source tree, along with posting whatever notices are
needed for anyone accessing the svn tree, the active developers will say
"thank you!", and it will be done.

The other person who has been most interested in the nuts and bolts of
the conversion is Andrew Straw. Although he is evidently very short of
mpl time these days, you might want to try to contact him directly to
see if he has thought of anything you might have overlooked.

I would like to be included in the group with git write access, unless
there is a clear decision to restrict this group to a very small core of
gatekeepers.

To support Darren's conversion work, here are the links to some numpy
discussions which might be, I think, of interest here:

[Numpy-discussion] curious about how people would feel about moving to github:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.numeric.general/38133

[Numpy-discussion] Technicalities of the SVN -> GIT transition:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.numeric.general/38263

[Numpy-discussion] First shot at svn->git conversion:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.numeric.general/39443

[Numpy-discussion] update on the transition to git/github:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.numeric.general/39102

[Numpy-discussion] Github migration?:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.numeric.general/40020

[Numpy-discussion] Can we freeze the subversion repository and move to
github this week?:
http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/2010-September/thread.html#52744
(this thread is apparently lost on gmane)

[Numpy-discussion] Numpy SVN frozen; move to Git:
http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/2010-September/thread.html#52811
(lost on Gmane too)

[Numpy-discussion] Commit rights on github:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.numeric.general/40812

[Numpy-discussion] Development workflow:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.numeric.general/40816

[Numpy-discussion] Another merge at github:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.numeric.general/40967

[Numpy-discussion] whitespace in git repo:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.numeric.general/41013

Okay, I think that's it.

I remember there were some problems getting the complete svn history
correctly transferred (it should be in above), but I cannot tell
specifics; we would have to ask on the numpy list for this.

Also, there was lots of discussion how to design the commit rights
(somewhere included above); since on github "pull requests" can be
filed, getting changes in with a committer different from the author
is simple. Cf. http://github.com/numpy/ (list of members of the
github organization).

It is possible to register "organization" accounts on GitHub, with
several members.

Friedrich

2011/1/22 Eric Firing <efiring@…229…>:

This doesn’t all have to be perfect; it just has to be good enough. I
suspect your conversion is good enough. If you are reasonably
confident, then I think that if you go ahead and set up a github repo as
the new official source tree, along with posting whatever notices are
needed for anyone accessing the svn tree, the active developers will say
“thank you!”, and it will be done.

The other person who has been most interested in the nuts and bolts of
the conversion is Andrew Straw. Although he is evidently very short of
mpl time these days, you might want to try to contact him directly to
see if he has thought of anything you might have overlooked.

I would like to be included in the group with git write access, unless
there is a clear decision to restrict this group to a very small core of
gatekeepers.

To support Darren’s conversion work, here are the links to some numpy
discussions which might be, I think, of interest here:

[Numpy-discussion] curious about how people would feel about moving to github:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.numeric.general/38133

[Numpy-discussion] Technicalities of the SVN -> GIT transition:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.numeric.general/38263

[Numpy-discussion] First shot at svn->git conversion:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.numeric.general/39443

[Numpy-discussion] update on the transition to git/github:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.numeric.general/39102

[Numpy-discussion] Github migration?:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.numeric.general/40020

[Numpy-discussion] Can we freeze the subversion repository and move to
github this week?:
http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/2010-September/thread.html#52744
(this thread is apparently lost on gmane)

[Numpy-discussion] Numpy SVN frozen; move to Git:
http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/2010-September/thread.html#52811
(lost on Gmane too)

[Numpy-discussion] Commit rights on github:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.numeric.general/40812

[Numpy-discussion] Development workflow:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.numeric.general/40816

[Numpy-discussion] Another merge at github:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.numeric.general/40967

[Numpy-discussion] whitespace in git repo:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.numeric.general/41013

Okay, I think that’s it.

I remember there were some problems getting the complete svn history
correctly transferred (it should be in above), but I cannot tell
specifics; we would have to ask on the numpy list for this.

I used Pauli’s work on numpy as a template to convert the mpl tell, and I am fairly confident that the history was correctly transferred. svn2git seems to have improved since numpy made the leap, and appears to have handled the merge of the transforms branch correctly, which may have been a considerable stress-test for the conversion routines.

That said, I would be more comfortable saying “lets do this” if I heard from more of the debate that the drop looks ok.

···

On Jan 22, 2011 3:38 PM, “Friedrich Romstedt” <friedrichromstedt@…149…> wrote:

Also, there was lots of discussion how to design the commit rights
(somewhere included above); since on github “pull requests” can be
filed, getting changes in with a committer different from the author
is simple. Cf. http://github.com/numpy/ (list of members of the
github organization).

It is possible to register “organization” accounts on GitHub, with
several members.

Friedrich


Special Offer-- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE (a $49 USD value)!
Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free!
Download using promo code Free_Logger_4_Dev2Dev. Offer expires
February 28th, so secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsight-sfd2d


Matplotlib-devel mailing list
Matplotlib-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/matplotlib-devel

Hi,

I want to set up a git mirror for matplotlib, but I 1) have some minor
problems and 2) want to know what others think about this.

Late last year, I did some work to convert the svn repository to git.
The code to d the conversion is available at
https://github.com/darrendale/mpl2git . The resulting git repo is
available at https://github.com/darrendale/matplotlib . I have not
pursued the project further because there did not seem to be enough
interest in migrating from svn/sourceforge to git/github to justify
investing more of my time in the project.

I’m a native git user and I don’t know how to use svn properly.

I read that as “uninterested in learning how to use svn”, and such
sentiment is probably a fact of life as many (most?) open source
projects move to DVC. In my opinion, matplotlib is likely to draw more
contributors if it lowers barriers to entry and uses a DVCS that is
growing in popularity, like git/github.

Darren

In discussions with Ryan May on the prospect of switching over to git, it
sounds like we have a “Bike Shed” problem where we (the main developers)
agree that we agree that a bike shed should be built, but we can’t agree on
the color to paint it…

In my view, the issue has nothing to do with bikeshedding.

Agreed. We did agree to move to git, and the only problem was that
most of us lack the expertise and time to be of much help in actually
getting it done. I think there was a bit of a hangup over the question
of migrating the bug tracking; but I suspect we could agree that this is
a secondary question, and that any such migration, if desired, can be
done at leisure after taking the primary step of switching the code repo.

I think the main source of the huge download size is the data that is coming
from the basemap toolkit. I do not think that it would be a good thing to
have everyone and their mother needing to do a ‘git clone’ on their computer
and find they have to pull down 500+ MB of stuff to get matplotlib. It is
because of this that a straight-forward migration from svn to matplotlib
won’t be possible.

The git repo at https://github.com/darrendale/matplotlib does not
include anything from basemap.

The key point being that you are converting matplotlib/trunk/matplotlib,
not matplotlib/trunk; the latter is what includes py4science, toolkits
(including basemap), sample_data, etc. I think this is the right approach.

This doesn’t all have to be perfect; it just has to be good enough. I
suspect your conversion is good enough. If you are reasonably
confident, then I think that if you go ahead and set up a github repo as
the new official source tree, along with posting whatever notices are
needed for anyone accessing the svn tree, the active developers will say
“thank you!”, and it will be done.

Thanks Eric, that’s encouraging. I am reasonably confident, but in the spirit of code review/cya, I would feel better if another dev chimed in that they were also reasonably confident without having to take my word for it.

···

On Jan 22, 2011 2:28 PM, “Eric Firing” <efiring@…229…> wrote:

On 01/22/2011 07:06 AM, Darren Dale wrote:

On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Benjamin Root<ben.root@…553…> wrote:

On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 10:26 AM, Darren Dale<dsdale24@…149…> wrote:

On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 9:09 AM, Friedrich Romstedt > >>> <friedrichromstedt@…149…> wrote:

The other person who has been most interested in the nuts and bolts of
the conversion is Andrew Straw. Although he is evidently very short of
mpl time these days, you might want to try to contact him directly to
see if he has thought of anything you might have overlooked.

I would like to be included in the group with git write access, unless
there is a clear decision to restrict this group to a very small core of
gatekeepers.

Eric

What have been the proposed solutions to dealing with basemap’s data?

Separate repo?


Special Offer-- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE (a $49 USD value)!
Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free!
Download using promo code Free_Logger_4_Dev2Dev. Offer expires
February 28th, so secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsight-sfd2d


Matplotlib-devel mailing list
Matplotlib-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/matplotlib-devel

Hi,

>> What have been the proposed solutions to dealing with basemap's data?
>
> Separate repo?

I just fished up some previous discussions:

http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.matplotlib.devel/8275
http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.matplotlib.devel/8461

Do I remember correctly that a plan was needed to keep track of the
relationship of matplotlib-proper, the sample data and basemap, when
they are not part of the same repository?

See y'all,

Matthew

I think this could be done with a separate repo, using modules to pull in the various components and keep the relationship in sync. I’m using modules in one of my own projects, and have been satisfied with the way it works. But we should really hear from the basemap devs, I don’t know if they are on board with a switch to git.

···

On Jan 22, 2011 5:28 PM, “Matthew Brett” <matthew.brett@…149…> wrote:

Hi,

What have been the proposed solutions to dealing with basemap’s data?

Separate repo?

I just fished up some previous discussions:

http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.matplotlib.devel/8275
http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.matplotlib.devel/8461

Do I remember correctly that a plan was needed to keep track of the
relationship of matplotlib-proper, the sample data and basemap, when
they are not part of the same repository?

Damn spellchecker. That should read submodules, not modules.

···

On Jan 22, 2011 9:06 PM, “Darren Dale” <dsdale24@…149…> wrote:

On Jan 22, 2011 5:28 PM, “Matthew Brett” <matthew.brett@…149…> wrote:

Hi,

What have been the proposed solutions to dealing with basemap’s data?

Separate repo?

I just fished up some previous discussions:

http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.matplotlib.devel/8275
http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.matplotlib.devel/8461

Do I remember correctly that a plan was needed to keep track of the
relationship of matplotlib-proper, the sample data and basemap, when
they are not part of the same repository?

I think this could be done with a separate repo, using modules to pull in the various components and keep the relationship in sync. I’m using modules in one of my own projects, and have been satisfied with the way it works. But we should really hear from the basemap devs, I don’t know if they are on board with a switch to git.

I agree with Eric and others in favor of flipping the switch on the
trunk/matplotlib conversion to github. Michael and I made some
comments on an earlier thread that we were happy with the svn repo,
acknowledging that as core developers we were happy using a central
svn repo but understanding that for others without easy commit access,
a distributed repo might be preferable. So the original decision made
many moons ago to switch has never been questioned, it's just that for
many of the developers, it has not been a driving need. But we'll
gladly stand behind anyone willing to do the work.

There are subtleties and difficulties around the mpl svn directories
that depend on trunk/matplotlib: sample_data, basemap, sampledoc, etc.
I think the solution is the one advocated above: just punt on it.
Let's convert the trunk and rely on good practice to keep the others
in sync. Ie, when basemap does a release, it can just tag the release
notes with "depends on matplotlib release XX or revision YY". Likewise
with sampledata, etc.

The official repo needs to be https://github.com/matplotlib, which is
the matplotlib organization. Darren is already a member, and it
looks like he has more bandwidth at this point than Andrew, so Darren
if you are ready to "flip the switch" and make an official github repo
under this organization, go for it. Once we get the trunk active,
we'll worry about the rest, like migrating the release branch. Of
course, if Andrew as the original force to move to github, has any
comments or concerns, we're certainly receptive to them. But we have
a recent release out, the buildbot is broken currently anyhow, and
this looks like a perfect time to make the move.

JDH

···

On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 3:26 PM, Darren Dale <dsdale24@...149...> wrote:

Thanks Eric, that's encouraging. I am reasonably confident, but in the
spirit of code review/cya, I would feel better if another dev chimed in that
they were also reasonably confident without having to take my word for it.

I can add you -- any developer who currently has mpl commit privs,
send me your github account name and I'll add you to the mpl
organization. Although a gatekeeper model may have its merits. and
you'd be a gatekeeper under any scenario, I prefer to keep our current
developer model of a large number of trusted committers rather than a
few gatekeepers.

I'd be willing to reconsider this model in the face of persuasive
argument *and* a few people willing to stand up and serve as patch
reviewers and gatekeepers, but until then, I think we have to rely on
good people making good contributions, in the presence of our unit
tests and host of people serving as crash test dummies by running off
HEAD....

JDH

···

On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 1:27 PM, Eric Firing <efiring@...229...> wrote:

I would like to be included in the group with git write access, unless
there is a clear decision to restrict this group to a very small core of
gatekeepers.

Somehow, I read that as "running with heads cut off"... It is late.

Anyway, I am willing to give a switchover a shot, and to continue the
current contrib model. Btw, if Friedrich hasn't been made a developer
yet, he has my vote (if he wants it).

Ben Root

···

On Saturday, January 22, 2011, John Hunter <jdh2358@...149...> wrote:

On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 1:27 PM, Eric Firing <efiring@...229...> wrote:

I would like to be included in the group with git write access, unless
there is a clear decision to restrict this group to a very small core of
gatekeepers.

I can add you -- any developer who currently has mpl commit privs,
send me your github account name and I'll add you to the mpl
organization. Although a gatekeeper model may have its merits. and
you'd be a gatekeeper under any scenario, I prefer to keep our current
developer model of a large number of trusted committers rather than a
few gatekeepers.

I'd be willing to reconsider this model in the face of persuasive
argument *and* a few people willing to stand up and serve as patch
reviewers and gatekeepers, but until then, I think we have to rely on
good people making good contributions, in the presence of our unit
tests and host of people serving as crash test dummies by running off
HEAD....

JDH

+1.

And for what it's worth, I keep nagging the IT people at my new employer to set me up the virtual machines for the new buildslaves...

-Andrew

···

On 23-Jan-11 04:05, John Hunter wrote:

Darren
if you are ready to "flip the switch" and make an official github repo
under this organization, go for it. Once we get the trunk active,
we'll worry about the rest, like migrating the release branch. Of
course, if Andrew as the original force to move to github, has any
comments or concerns, we're certainly receptive to them. But we have
a recent release out, the buildbot is broken currently anyhow, and
this looks like a perfect time to make the move.

I need to improve the authorship mapping, so the authors of svn
commits will be identified using their git information in the new
repository. For the following svn accounts, I need "Real Name
<real@...918...>" information as it will appear when committing to the
new git repository (not your old svn info, unless it will be the
same). Look in the [user] section of ~/.gitconfig, if you have one.

jdh2358
efiring
mdboom
mdehoon
jswhit
weathergod
leejjoon
jouni
jrevans
ryanmay
ianthomas23
cmoad
pivanov314

Please send it to me ASAP.

···

On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 6:25 AM, Andrew Straw <strawman@...36...> wrote:

On 23-Jan-11 04:05, John Hunter wrote:

Darren
if you are ready to "flip the switch" and make an official github repo
under this organization, go for it. Once we get the trunk active,
we'll worry about the rest, like migrating the release branch. Of
course, if Andrew as the original force to move to github, has any
comments or concerns, we're certainly receptive to them. But we have
a recent release out, the buildbot is broken currently anyhow, and
this looks like a perfect time to make the move.

+1.

And for what it's worth, I keep nagging the IT people at my new employer to
set me up the virtual machines for the new buildslaves...

In case anyone was wondering, that was the result of the android spell
checker, not alzheimers.

···

On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Darren Dale <dsdale24@...149...> wrote:

That said, I would be more comfortable saying "lets do this" if I heard from
more of the debate that the drop looks ok.

2011/1/23 Benjamin Root <ben.root@...553...>:

Btw, if Friedrich hasn't been made a developer
yet, he has my vote (if he wants it).

I feel very much honoured by this, it is a great belated Christmas
gift, so I like it very much that you speak up for me, but currently I
don't feel like a "core dev". Maybe, when matplotlib-filters
(formerly matplotlib-grayscale) is through and committed, maybe then
I'm confident enough.

Best,
Friedrich

I'm curious about this project -- google doesn't reveal much.

As for commit privileges, my usual standard is that the candidate has
become a nuisance to the other developers. That is, they are
contributing patches faster than we can review them :slight_smile: That is a bit
tongue in cheek, but I do like to see several patches that reveal a
significant understanding of mpl internals and compliance with our
coding standards. Ben's handling of several 3D bugs certainly put him
in this category in my view, as this is a particularly hairy part of
the code and there were not many developers who were able to review
his patches because he was one of the few experts on this part of the
code, and handling 3D properly means you have a pretty good grasp of
the 2D stack.

Friedrich hasn't become a nuisance yet <wink>. When he does, I'll be
happy to add him....

JDH

···

On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 2:53 PM, Friedrich Romstedt <friedrichromstedt@...149...> wrote:

I feel very much honoured by this, it is a great belated Christmas
gift, so I like it very much that you speak up for me, but currently I
don't feel like a "core dev". Maybe, when matplotlib-filters
(formerly matplotlib-grayscale) is through and committed, maybe then
I'm confident enough.