Re: Community fork for django-piston.

[David Guaraglia]

Hi guys,

I'm forwarding this message from Jorge Cardona that appears to be having trouble sending messages to the list. Below, my answer.

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: Jorge Cardona <jorgee...@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 12:39 AM
Subject: Community fork for django-piston.
To: dguar...@gmail.com


Hi,

I have tried to write to the thread in django-piston group but as I'm
a new user in the group my message are moderated by jespern and I
think that he is quite busy right now. My second message was:

"""
Hi,

I use piston, but I tried recently tastypie, and I'm returning back to
piston, but I want to see new features in piston and I think that we
should use an organization in github to have the code. The mozilla
repo has only 6 commits more than the jespern one in bitbucket. I've
created an organization called django-piston, and import all the code
from bitbucket.

I have never manage an open source project before, but I assume that
the community has more experience in this, so, anyone want to manage
the organization and repo? I can give it a try, it would be nice to do
it but I need some help with it.

I think that we should create a team that can decide for the future of
piston, I really appreciate the work of jaspern, but we all need more
updates on piston, and the community should work as a team in this.

Just let me know what you think about it.

https://github.com/django-piston/django-piston

Best Regards.
"""

My aim is to centralize the work of all the django-piston community
and create and organization is the best way (I think so), and we can
create a development team, but I don't know how to maintain an open
source project, but I can give it a try.

Would you please send the message to the group in my name? and please
let me know what do you think about the organization idea in github.

Bye.


--
Jorge Eduardo Cardona
jorgee...@gmail.com
jorgeecardona.blogspot.com
------------------------------------------------
Linux registered user  #391186
Registered machine    #291871
------------------------------------------------

Jorge: 

First, I really like the idea of having our own "django-piston" fork in Github, the only issue I see with using the name is that people might confuse it for the "official" django-piston, while in fact we'd be more of a "community fork". Maybe renaming the group to something like "django-piston-community" would be more accurate and avoid confusion.

Second, one of the many issues Piston forks (mine included) seem to have is that people tend to fix the issues that they find and then just leave the fork as it is. In other words: not very helpful for new users looking for a "best of patches compilation" fork. I imagine a good way to deal with that is by having a group of people that are able to commit directly to the repo, rather than the lone developer that is the default Github model. That way, even if the creator is too busy to pull patches from pull requests, someone else can do it.

So, it's a good start. I hope we get more input from people on the list!

Cheers,

David

[Rafa Muñoz Cárdenas]

+1 for the new community fork.

https://github.com/django-piston/django-piston

I think Jespern should be communicated about this.

> jorgeecard...@gmail.com

[Jorge Cardona]

Well, I'm waiting for some kind of advise from him, but i think that
I can't write even to this mailing list. Maybe he is just too busy,
but we as a community should create new standards to grow
django-piston.

2011/3/3 Rafa Muñoz Cárdenas <bym...@gmail.com>:

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "django-piston" group.
> To post to this group, send email to django...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-pisto...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-piston?hl=en.
>
>

--
Jorge Eduardo Cardona
jorgee...@gmail.com

[jespern]

Has anyone volunteered to be the new maintainer? I'm waiting for that.


Jesper

On Mar 13, 7:53 pm, Jorge Cardona <jorgeecard...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well,  I'm waiting for some kind of advise from him, but i think that
> I can't write even to this mailing list. Maybe he is just too busy,
> but we as a community should create new standards to grow
> django-piston.
>

> 2011/3/3 Rafa Muñoz Cárdenas <byme...@gmail.com>:

> > For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/django-piston?hl=en.
>
> --
> Jorge Eduardo Cardona

[Jorge Cardona]

I can do it.

> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-piston?hl=en.
>
>

--
Jorge Eduardo Cardona
jorgee...@gmail.com

[Malcolm Box]

A good starting place for someone who wants to be the maintainer might be to gather up a list of various patches/branches floating around the net and create:

- a list of each one considered
- a tree containing ones felt worth including
- reasons why the others didn't make the cut.

The new tree would then be a good place to start the fork - and there'd be evidence that someone had the time and energy to be the maintainer.

In my opinion, only after someone has stepped up to do this is it worth having a discussion on what future directions might be wanted for piston.

Malcolm

[gonzal...@gmail.com]

On 14 March 2011 12:14, Malcolm Box <malco...@gmail.com> wrote:
> A good starting place for someone who wants to be the maintainer might be to
> gather up a list of various patches/branches floating around the net and
> create:
>

[...]

I've been following the threads not as much close I'd have liked to
but what if we don't make the fork but permission to write into the
current branch is allowed? IMO every FLOSS project must to have more
than one committer if not so, people tends to think to make a fork, oh
wait, we're actually doing it...

IMVHO, django-piston so far is just a project of one person only,
that's not a community one. We should choose maintainers and avoid the
fork. However, if the current project owner is not willing to, +1 with
the fork.

Sorry if I got late to this discussion.
Regards.

> - a list of each one considered
> - a tree containing ones felt worth including
> - reasons why the others didn't make the cut.
>
> The new tree would then be a good place to start the fork - and there'd be
> evidence that someone had the time and energy to be the maintainer.
>
> In my opinion, only after someone has stepped up to do this is it worth
> having a discussion on what future directions might be wanted for piston.
>
> Malcolm
>
> On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 10:30 PM, Jorge Cardona <jorgee...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> I can do it.
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 4:24 AM, jespern <jno...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Has anyone volunteered to be the new maintainer? I'm waiting for that.
>> >
>> >
>> > Jesper
>> >
>> > On Mar 13, 7:53 pm, Jorge Cardona <jorgeecard...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> Well,  I'm waiting for some kind of advise from him, but i think that
>> >> I can't write even to this mailing list. Maybe he is just too busy,
>> >> but we as a community should create new standards to grow
>> >> django-piston.
>> >>
>> >> 2011/3/3 Rafa Muñoz Cárdenas <byme...@gmail.com>:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > +1 for the new community fork.
>> >>
>> >> >https://github.com/django-piston/django-piston

[...]

>

--
http://www.mgonzalez.cl/
http://twitter.com/gonzalemario

[Przemek Lach]

Hi,

I would like throw my name in as a maintainer/contributer/whatever you
need. I've been using Piston for the last year or so and I think it's
a very worthwhile project.

I've never contributed/maintained an open source project before so I
would definitely like to work side along someone who has some
experience.

Let me know if you are interested and what I need to do. Thanks.


Przemek Lach
http://www.linkedin.com/in/przemeklach

[Marcel Caraciolo]

I'd like also to contribute to this great project as maintainer or contributer. I've been using Piston in our social network and I believe I could help the community to evolve this project.

Count on me, 

Cheers,

Marcel Caraciolo

Marcel Pinheiro Caraciolo
M.S.C. Candidate at CIN/UFPE

   http://www.mobideia.com
   http://aimotion.blogspot.com/

[Jorge Cardona]

Hi,

This is great, and I'm completely agree with Malcolm, I will start to
enumerate all forks of piston out there, and I can open the
administration of the django-piston organization in github to other
members, and build a contributors team of several members.

I will try first to check the current tickets in bitbucket, and then
list the current forks, and see if they changes are part of some
actual ticket in bitbucket. I don't know how is the actual test
infrastructure of piston and the coverage of the code with the tests,
I want to see this part first, in order to not break actual behaviour.

Just let me know if you are agree with this.

I'm also think that we should work in a single fork as mario says, but
we have been waiting for more than a year for new features in the
jespern tree, and I think that github is more likely to build a
contributors team, but at the end, we can handle the code in github
and bitbucket at the same time, is not a real concern.

I think the current members that want to contribute are:

- Marcel Caraciolo
- Przemek Lach

Anyone else?, I think that we should have here an strict policy with
the unit test before any merge to the branch tree, let me see how is
the actual infrastructure of this first, and the actual coverage of
the tests. I'm working lately with pre-commits using hooks that run
the tests? are you agree with this?.

I'm also work with pivotal tracker are you agree with a public project
to manage the stories for piston?

Any comments are welcome.

Bye.

--
Jorge Eduardo Cardona
jorgee...@gmail.com

[umb...@gmail.com]

As a relatively nonbiased third party: I think the rub here has been where to -host- the code. I think a number of people here want to host on github, which Jespern is obviously not an advocate for since he works for bitbucket (and that's good!)

I personally have no opinion on that, having not used either extensively.

[Ovnicraft]

IMHO its ok, so what happen with documentation from bitbucket, we need migrate it too, if you want i can help in this way. 

--
Cristian Salamea
@ovnicraft

[sebastian-castillo]

I can contribute to this good project too.

Next steps we have to make, as far as i can see:

* Define project policies (Or reuse if any)
* Using policies maybe prioritize tickets
* In the same way define team members (keeping it simple)
* And very important: Start closing tickets!

As an open source project i the way Debian works (but again to move
fast we need to keep it simple), why do you think?
So we may have a wiki where to have the community documentation,
policies and let it grow with time while we are closing some tickets.

Jorge im agree using pivotal tracker.

> > On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 2:45 PM, Przemek Lach <przemyslawl...@gmail.com>

[Tom Christie]

I think the rub here has been where to -host- the code.

You could always host on both - http://hg-git.github.com/

Keep the canonical version on bitbucket, with a clone on git.

(I don't have any strong feeling re github vs bitbucket myself, but IMHO it'd kinda be bad form to move the project to github, given that bitbucket is jesper's baby)

Cheers,

  Tom

[jespern]

That's a good point. And I've said before, I'd be very sad to see the
project leave Bitbucket. Hg's not that different, and I'm working on
making it much, much easier to see changes between forks. The new
compare view[1] should help immensely.


Jesper

[1]: http://blog.bitbucket.org/2011/03/04/compare-view-v2-0-diff-between-forks/

On Mar 17, 2:25 am, Tom Christie <christie....@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think the rub here has been where to -host- the code.
>

> You could always host on both -http://hg-git.github.com/

[Ovnicraft]

I think we need to decide keep it in bitbucket or move it to github then we can define points what @Sebastian named before.

I' see very simple this, creator and major contributor decide it (better if is now) what to do.

copied from Sebastian suggestions:

* Define new maintainer for code an documentation

* Define project policies (Or reuse if any) here @jespern can help us

* Using policies maybe prioritize tickets
* In the same way define team members (keeping it simple)

Regards,

Cheers,

  Tom

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "django-piston" group.
To post to this group, send email to django...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-pisto...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-piston?hl=en.

--
Cristian Salamea
@ovnicraft

[Joe Banafato]

+1 bitbucket

[Yohan Boniface]

+1 for bitbucket for the reasons explained before :)

( Also, what about having a #django-piston on IRC ? )

2011/3/17 Joe Banafato <j...@banafato.com>

[Mike Blume]

Hi

I'm new to the list. I'm Mike Blume, I'm a developer at Loggly, and
we've been using (and occasionally patching) Piston for a while. I had
been thinking for the past few days about publishing our fork myself,
but since there seems to be a community process taking place, I'd like
to be involved.

-Mike

On Mar 21, 2:29 am, Yohan Boniface <yohanbonif...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 for bitbucket for the reasons explained before :)
>
> ( Also, what about having a #django-piston on IRC ? )
>
> 2011/3/17 Joe Banafato <j...@banafato.com>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > +1 bitbucket
>

> > On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 11:06 AM, Ovnicraft <ovnicr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Tom Christie <christie....@gmail.com>

> > > wrote:
>
> > >> I think the rub here has been where to -host- the code.
>

> > >> You could always host on both -http://hg-git.github.com/