Github migration

[giampaolo]

From g.rodola on July 13, 2013 01:05:15

I've been thinking about this for a very long time for a number of different 
reasons, the main ones being the enhanced visibility github gives to developers 
and the possibility to clone repositories.
As it happened with the SVN->Mercurial migration, I know this is gonna be 
painful, but I share the thoughts expressed in this blog post 
http://beets.radbox.org/blog/github-issues.html and in the end I think this is 
gonna be worth it.

Original issue: http://code.google.com/p/psutil/issues/detail?id=407

[giampaolo]

From [email protected] on July 12, 2013 19:25:41

That'll probably be a big migration considering the project has been on Google 
Code from the beginning! 

What's the major benefit to GitHub besides visibility? How does the bug tracker 
and other integration compare? I've never used it to manage a project (only 
downloaded source from GH before) so I'm not sure what it'd look like by 
comparison.

Will we be able to maintain project history (issue tracking, source, etc.?) 
with the migration?

[giampaolo]

From g.rodola on July 17, 2013 06:08:50

Yes, I know it's gonna be a big migration. =(

In all honesty I don't see actual "major" benefits besides visibility but 
visibility and the interaction with other developers that github offers when it 
comes to cloning repositories is a big incentive.
Also, now that I'm applying for different job positions I'm realizing how 
github is taken into consideration as *a lot* of recruiters ask for a github 
profile in order to easily see all your coding history (Google Code had 
something like this but they disabled the functionality a long time ago, see: 
https://code.google.com/p/support/issues/detail?id=24324 ).

Anyway, being this a serious change I thinl I will port pysendfile project 
first, see how it goes and report back here, and I don't expect to do this any 
time soon considering the amount of stuff I'm going through lately.

As for the issue tracker I noticed there are a bunch of tools which are able to 
import all issues. The only downside is that dates and attachments are not 
gonna be preserved.

Source code migration should be smooth.

As for the wiki: we only use one page at the moment, which is not part of the 
current code base (not revisioned) . What I'd like to do is revision the doc 
and port it to https://readthedocs.org/ , which has rapidly become the 
standard-de-facto for open source python projects.

[giampaolo]

From [email protected] on July 17, 2013 08:20:14

Fair enough... losing the dates and attachments on the issues would be a bummer 
(means losing any submitted patches, and date context) but at least if we can 
preserve source history that's something since commit history would contain the 
same info more or less.

Wiki shouldn't be a big deal to move one doc over so that makes sense to me.

[giampaolo]

From Stuart.Boston on July 17, 2013 08:40:29

Forgive me for sticking my nose in, as I saw your post on the google code group.
I have migrated a couple of my projects over to github ( 
https://code.google.com/p/themoviedbapi/ & 
https://code.google.com/p/javatvdbapi/ ) to https://github.com/Omertron I found 
the transition relatively painless. As you can see I left the original projects 
suspended so I can always go back and look at previous commits (although they 
can be migrated over) and issues if I ever need too.

I've never needed too. Honestly, go for it, migrate over and see how you get 
on, the worst case is that you have to merge some of the code back in. You 
absolutely do not need to delete your google code site whilst you try it out.

The stats, issue management, milestone integration and continued updates and 
improvements to the platform have won me over (but I'm not a professional coder)

Don't get me wrong, there are issues. There have been a couple of outages over 
the last few months. They must have lasted a few hours and the website is 
updated with the current status and expected resolution time.

[lurch]

https://code.google.com/p/psutil/issues/detail?id=407 now ends with:
Please do NOT reply here but use this instead:
#498

I suspect you actually meant to link to this issue ( #407 ) instead?

[giampaolo]

Yes, my fault (fixed).