[Pulp-dev] Moving the pulp/pulp repo to pulp/pulpcore

[Neal Gompa]

On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 11:30 AM Brian Bouterse <bbouters at redhat.com> wrote:

> Ok it sounds like Thursday is our day. I'm planning on 5pm UTC
> https://www.worldtimebuddy.com/?qm=1&lid=4460243,100,3078610&h=4460243&date=2019-2-28&sln=12-13
>
> At that time a few things will happen:
> * I'll perform the cutover, removing pulp/pulp:master, and making
> pulp/pulp:2-master the primary branch (nothing changes for pulp2)
> * I'll send a note to pulp-dev immediately w/ some basic instructions on
> how to port your repos. (basically delete, fork, fresh clone)
> * I'll be closing the Pulp3 PRs on pulp/pulp and opening them on
> pulp/pulpcore
> * I will cutover only over the Pulp3 tags
> * applying Travis updates to use the new repo on other various repos that
> rely on source checkouts of pulp/pulp (these will be prepped ahead of time)
>
> I'll be preparing that morning, so feel free to ask any questions on IRC
> or email ahead of time.
>

How are you doing this? Are you planning on renaming pulp/pulp to
pulp/pulpcore, then creating a new pulp/pulp repo with the old stuff? If
you're doing that, how do you plan to migrate PRs across? I didn't think
GitHub supported that. If you're doing the inverse (creating a new
pulp/pulpcore instead), then how will the pulp 3 PRs move?

What I would actually suggest is archiving the existing pulp/pulp repo, and
creating two new ones: pulp/pulpcore (for Pulp 3), and pulp/pulp-legacy
(for pulp 2). This makes it a clean break for both, and makes it a lot less
confusing to understand what happened and how people should target. This
also has the advantage of not requiring you to do weird things to the Git
repo.

Everyone also gets to endure the pain at once too, which makes things a lot
simpler.


-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20190226/f918031b/attachment.htm>