[Feedhenry-raincatcher] RainCatcher Monorepo
Peter Darrow
pdarrow at redhat.com
Mon Mar 6 04:02:29 UTC 2017
Hey guys,
So unfortunately I was unable to complete the migration Friday as I had
hoped. I was testing the demo apps after combining all the master branches,
but ran into this error:
Error: fh-wfm-mediator/lib/array-store is now located at the
> fh-wfm-simple-store module, please install it instead.
> at Object.<anonymous>
> (/home/summers/Projects/raincatcher/modules/raincatcher-mediator/lib/array-store.js:2:9)
> at Module._compile (module.js:409:26)
> at Object.Module._extensions..js (module.js:416:10)
> at Module.load (module.js:343:32)
> at Function.Module._load (module.js:300:12)
> at Module.require (module.js:353:17)
> at require (internal/module.js:12:17)
> at Object.<anonymous>
> (/home/summers/Projects/raincatcher/modules/raincatcher-user/lib/user/store.js:4:18)
> at Module._compile (module.js:409:26)
> at Object.Module._extensions..js (module.js:416:10)
> at Module.load (module.js:343:32)
> at Function.Module._load (module.js:300:12)
> at Module.require (module.js:353:17)
> at require (internal/module.js:12:17)
> at Object.<anonymous>
> (/home/summers/Projects/raincatcher/raincatcher-demo-auth/lib/user.js:3:23)
> at Module._compile (module.js:409:26)
> at Object.Module._extensions..js (module.js:416:10)
> at Module.load (module.js:343:32)
> at Function.Module._load (module.js:300:12)
> at Module.require (module.js:353:17)
> at require (internal/module.js:12:17)
> at
> /home/summers/Projects/raincatcher/raincatcher-demo-auth/application.js:72:7
I thought it may be an issue with my migration script, but turns out this
occurs with a normal Raincatcher dev environment set up with
raincatcher-cli (thanks for the help Summers). The error is
self-explanatory, but means that master is currently broken. Is anyone
aware that it isn't working? I wanted to hold off and get this remedied (or
at least confirmed that it's expected) before starting the new monorepo.
I'm going to test the combined "development" in the morning; does anyone
know if there will be surprises there? In other words, if I checked out
"development" on all the individual repos, should the demo apps work
properly?
Peter
On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 10:24 AM, Niall Donnelly <ndonnell at redhat.com> wrote:
> +1 for the documentation on migrating branches.
>
> Other than that Onwards from me!!
>
> Nice one Peter!!
>
> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 2:15 PM, Peter Darrow <pdarrow at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Summers I think we'll leave the final code at HEAD. I agree while the
>> project is small and we're iterating quickly that we should keep things
>> centralized. As far as manual QA of the portal app goes, I think that's a
>> good idea for a sanity check. And re: blog post, I have no problem writing
>> that!
>>
>> Emilio: Great point, I will document the steps required to migrate active
>> branches—it will probably be manual but pretty straightforward I think.
>>
>> *Note: I plan on completing this migration today. If you have strong
>> feelings for or against this, please voice them in the next few hours.*
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 7:07 AM, Emilio Rodriguez Martinez <
>> emrodrig at redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Any idea on how are we going to migrate our unfinished work to the
>>> monorepo? I think it would be nice to prepare a quick email explaining the
>>> steps needed to do this as I guess it will be quite a manual process.
>>>
>>> Other than that everything looks good to me, I'm really looking forward
>>> to see this working :)
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 7:10 PM, Summers Pittman <supittma at redhat.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 8:58 AM, Peter Darrow <pdarrow at redhat.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hey all,
>>>>>
>>>>> So after chatting with Paolo and Wojciech last week, we decided it
>>>>> probably makes the most sense to just migrate the migrate the master and
>>>>> development branches from each repo, and leave the repos up (with
>>>>> deprecation warnings on them) for any other branches people are working on
>>>>> or tags we need.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> +1, will we leave the final code at HEAD or will we clear it our and
>>>> leave the code at HEAD~1?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I've pushed up this proposed structure to https://github.com/feedhenr
>>>>> y-raincatcher/raincatcher. As you can see, development is 220 commits
>>>>> ahead of master. Does this seem right to you guys? You can see the
>>>>> comparison here: https://github.com/feedhenry-r
>>>>> aincatcher/raincatcher/compare/development. Approximately 35 of the
>>>>> commits are merges I made as a part of the migration, but that still leave
>>>>> 185 commits ahead which seems like a lot.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> /s/apps/demos or examples?
>>>>
>>>> Eventually we may want to break the examples into their own project (ex
>>>> https://github.com/wildfly-swarm/wildfly-swarm-examples), but right
>>>> now while the project is small and we are doing a lot of quick development
>>>> keeping them together makes a lot of sense.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> The next steps I propose are:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Configure travis to build all of the projects in the monorepo
>>>>> (on each branch and PR)
>>>>> 2. Identify and manually migrate any branches that people are
>>>>> working on outside of master and development
>>>>> 3. Choose a day/time to stop development on the individual repos
>>>>> (likely late on a Friday)
>>>>> 4. Run the migration script one last time
>>>>> 5. Resume regular development on the monorepo
>>>>> 6. Update script(s) for publishing releases to npm
>>>>>
>>>>> Does this seem reasonable to everyone? I was thinking this Friday
>>>>> might be a good opportunity to switch over, but I'd love to get your
>>>>> feedback.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It seems reasonable, maybe add a run of the portal app in here as
>>>> well? Also who is going to write the blog post to discuss the migration?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Peter
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 11:41 AM, Paolo Haji <phaji at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Along with lerna we can start adding global utils to the top level,
>>>>>> so `*npm start*` could fire up all demo-apps (with optional task
>>>>>> runner and through forever/nodemon). If we move to a nice logging library
>>>>>> like debug <https://github.com/visionmedia/debug> we can have
>>>>>> consolidated logs and in a filterable form that would be useful for both
>>>>>> local dev and cluster deployments.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As for tags, I'm not sure it will be of much value keeping their
>>>>>> history since they'll not be actual tags that show up as GH releases, we
>>>>>> can keep the old repos around as reference until then.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Our releases as a monorepo would be consolidating all version numbers
>>>>>> across all modules right? We can start off with a new major c.f. angular
>>>>>> 4.x
>>>>>> <http://angularjs.blogspot.com.br/2016/12/ok-let-me-explain-its-going-to-be.html>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 12:19 PM, Peter Darrow <pdarrow at redhat.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Wojciech as I mentioned the tool is buggy and really doesn't make a
>>>>>>> master branch, I think it leaves that up to us. I was mostly looking for
>>>>>>> feedback on the approach. So is this what you're proposing:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1. Move the demo apps into a "apps" subdirectory
>>>>>>> 2. Move the modules into a "packages" subdirectory
>>>>>>> 3. Move the documentation into a "docs" subdirectory
>>>>>>> 4. Combine all branches named "master" from each individual repo
>>>>>>> into one master branch
>>>>>>> 5. Combine all branches named "development" from each individual
>>>>>>> repo into one master branch
>>>>>>> 6. Copy the tags from each individual repo to the monorepo with
>>>>>>> the following naming scheme: "<original tag name>-<original repo name>"
>>>>>>> 7. Ensured the history stays intact.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> #6 is the one I'm most curious about—how should we attempt to
>>>>>>> migrate these tags? Or do we not migrate at all as Emilio suggests and just
>>>>>>> keep the old repos around for resurrecting old tags, etc.?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Emilio as far as building and running the apps, https://lernajs.io/
>>>>>>> should help us with some of this but we may need a small script to help
>>>>>>> devs run all the apps at once (a slimmed down raincatcher-cli maybe?). Any
>>>>>>> suggestions there?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Peter
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 10:49 AM, Wojciech Trocki <
>>>>>>> wtrocki at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Where is master :P ?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Import seems to be doing something we do not want - creating new
>>>>>>>> branch for each of the module. Best would be to have only 2 branches for
>>>>>>>> that mono repo:
>>>>>>>> - master (containing all modules from master with history)
>>>>>>>> - development (with all modules from development branch)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Having it this way would mean that we would not be able to have
>>>>>>>> every component on development branch.
>>>>>>>> If perl is a problem maybe we should use some different tools.
>>>>>>>> Fastline migration seems to be something we can use:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://github.com/fastlane/monorepo/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Wojciech Trocki
>>>>>>>> Red Hat Mobile
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 2:21 PM, Peter Darrow <pdarrow at redhat.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hey all,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I spent a bunch of time yesterday stitching together our repos
>>>>>>>>> into a single repo. My goal was to try and identify issues that might make
>>>>>>>>> this challenging. You can see the results here:
>>>>>>>>> https://github.com/feedhenry-raincatcher/raincatcher-stitched/.
>>>>>>>>> My approach was the following:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 1. Move the demo apps into a "apps" subdirectory
>>>>>>>>> 2. Move the modules into a "packages" subdirectory
>>>>>>>>> 3. Move the documentation into a "docs" subdirectory
>>>>>>>>> 4. Copy the branches from each individual repo to a branch on
>>>>>>>>> the monorepo with the following naming scheme: "<original branch
>>>>>>>>> name>-<original repo name>".
>>>>>>>>> 5. Copy the tags from each individual repo to the monorepo
>>>>>>>>> with the following naming scheme: "<original tag name>-<original repo name>"
>>>>>>>>> 6. Ensured the history stays intact.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I found a tool that promised to implement this exact approach (
>>>>>>>>> http://search.cpan.org/dist/Git-FastExport/script/git-stitch-repo).
>>>>>>>>> It's written in Perl and I spent an unreasonable amount of time yesterday
>>>>>>>>> trying to configure my system to install CPAN modules :/. Eventually I got
>>>>>>>>> it working, but if you take a look at the stitched repo, it seems to have
>>>>>>>>> done an incomplete job. I'm not a Perl developer so I don't think it would
>>>>>>>>> be worth my time to try to contribute a fix, but I think I could implement
>>>>>>>>> something similar with a bit of effort.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> What do you guys think—do we need to migrate all of the branches
>>>>>>>>> from each repo, or just the master from each one? Do we care about the
>>>>>>>>> history? Is it important to keep every single tag? Let me know what you
>>>>>>>>> think!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Peter
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> Feedhenry-raincatcher mailing list
>>>>>>>>> Feedhenry-raincatcher at redhat.com
>>>>>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/feedhenry-raincatcher
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Feedhenry-raincatcher mailing list
>>>>>>> Feedhenry-raincatcher at redhat.com
>>>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/feedhenry-raincatcher
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Feedhenry-raincatcher mailing list
>>>>> Feedhenry-raincatcher at redhat.com
>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/feedhenry-raincatcher
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Feedhenry-raincatcher mailing list
>>>> Feedhenry-raincatcher at redhat.com
>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/feedhenry-raincatcher
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Feedhenry-raincatcher mailing list
>> Feedhenry-raincatcher at redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/feedhenry-raincatcher
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/feedhenry-raincatcher/attachments/20170306/438922fb/attachment.htm>
More information about the Feedhenry-raincatcher
mailing list