[ASLO] [Sugar-devel] Activities added to GithHub

[Samuel Cantero]

I'm agree with Walter.

We should move activities repos from git.sugarlabs.org to github.org with
the whole commit history. It would be nice to keep all repos with same
format in name and inside one Github organization exclusively dedicated for
activities.

Regards,

On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 10:42 PM, Tony Anderson <tony_anderson at usa.net>
wrote:

> Hi, Ignacio
>
> I am open to suggestions (accusations not accepted). I am a newbie in this
> and largely unqualified; however, I don't see a rush of more qualified
> volunteers to take this task on.
>
> Many, possibly a majority of these activities have not been touched since
> 2010. I would not like to wait until we get contact from contributors who
> have moved on to a day job.
>
> If all of the ASLO activities can be moved as repositories to
> github/sugarlabs - nothing has been lost. Corrections can be made to those
> repositories to include the famous 'repeal and replace'. The immediate
> benefit is that the developer hub on ASLO can be discontinued simplifying
> an effort to make ALSO itself more stable and maintainable.
>
> In addition, github makes it easier for the community at large to make
> corrections or improvements to the activities knowing that they are working
> on the one and only official version.
>
> In any case, a repository appears to give no credit to the creator - only
> to contributors. Contributions are, by definition, post the move of the
> repository to github.
>
> I am looking for advice on how to relate git.sugarlabs.org to the github
> repositories.
>
> Tony
>
>
> On 04/23/2017 10:23 AM, Ignacio Rodríguez wrote:
>
> I think we should focus on contact the creators of the activities before
> moving them -- sugar-activities org basically contains all aslo activities
> and nothing else (which can be used in case any activity has no
> maintainer/git repository)  --; probably most of the activities are in
> git.sugarlabs.org (so we can move them safely).
>
> On Apr 22, 2017 22:24, "Walter Bender" <walter.bender at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Tony,
>>
>> I can not speak for every contributor, but there is a lot more to
>> contributing to a project than the end result. Many contributors take pride
>> in their contributions and these days, one's GitHub contributions have
>> value in the job market. A wholesale removal of the git history by Sugar
>> Labs does not send a very welcoming message to past or future contributors.
>> On a more mundane level, the lack of history means as a developer I have no
>> way of knowing whom to ask for help.
>>
>> -walter
>>
>> On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 9:17 PM, Tony Anderson < <tony_anderson at usa.net>
>> tony_anderson at usa.net> wrote:
>>
>>> The process for installing repositories requires that the target
>>> repository be empty.
>>>
>>> I would appreciate someone who could itemize what needs to be in a
>>> repository such as the license, .gitignore, README.md, and so on. Much of
>>> that can probably be done by a script using the information available from
>>> ASLO.
>>>
>>> My sense is that PRs are appropriate for changes to an activities
>>> functions (such as a port to gtk3) but not for housekeeping.
>>>
>>> Tony
>>>
>>> On 04/23/2017 07:27 AM, Love Mehta wrote:
>>>
>>> There are many activities lacking a description at
>>> https://github.com/sugar-activities/  and it is hard to know the name
>>> and purpose of the activity specially in the web activities where one has
>>> to open the index.html file. I think we should add the descriptions from
>>> https://activities.sugarlabs.org for each activity to the readme
>>> markdown file. I thought of doing this but this will lead to a large number
>>> of pull requests. Should I go ahead with it?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Walter Bender
>> Sugar Labs
>> http://www.sugarlabs.org
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/aslo/attachments/20170422/fce5f9f6/attachment-0001.html>