Re: [Twisted-Python] bringing LDAP back
On Jul 1, 2014, at 11:57 AM, Tommi Virtanen <tommi.virtanen@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 11:49 AM, Glyph Lefkowitz <glyph@twistedmatrix.com> wrote:
(Also, please be careful, and don't push to the main Twisted repo if you work on Twisted. Github is super obnoxious about mirroring; we can't turn off pull requests and we can't turn off pushes even though it's really supposed to be a read-only mirror right now, and pushes to that repository break our SVN integration.)
I'm no Github expert, but you should be able to just make people be in a non-"Owners" team, and then selectively give that team push access to only the repos you want.
The "Owners" team probably gives non-admin contributors too much power in the first place.
This is indeed a better idea. I'll still need the list of names for that team though ;) -g
On 1 July 2014 21:06, Glyph Lefkowitz <glyph@twistedmatrix.com> wrote:
On Jul 1, 2014, at 11:57 AM, Tommi Virtanen <tommi.virtanen@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 11:49 AM, Glyph Lefkowitz <glyph@twistedmatrix.com> wrote:
(Also, please be careful, and don't push to the main Twisted repo if you work on Twisted. Github is super obnoxious about mirroring; we can't turn off pull requests and we can't turn off pushes even though it's really supposed to be a read-only mirror right now, and pushes to that repository break our SVN integration.)
I'm no Github expert, but you should be able to just make people be in a non-"Owners" team, and then selectively give that team push access to only the repos you want.
Not only this, I still like the idea of forking from Twisted/ldaptor in my own repo and working on my own branch. When finished, I usually send a merge request upstream, in this case to Twisted/ldaptor. I assume that it would either be accepted or rejected with comments. If this is too much overhead for you, then the below is a good idea and give make us contributors.
The "Owners" team probably gives non-admin contributors too much power in the first place.
This works by creating a team with 'write access' to twisted/ldaptor. This would make you (Glyph) the gatekeeper (admin access by default) in adding and kicking members out of the group. The rest of the world is technically in the 'read access' team as is the nature of open organizations on github.
This is indeed a better idea.
I'll still need the list of names for that team though ;)
psi29a https://github.com/psi29a
-g
Cheers! :)
On Jul 1, 2014, at 2:19 PM, Bret Curtis <bret.curtis@amplidata.com> wrote:
On 1 July 2014 21:06, Glyph Lefkowitz <glyph@twistedmatrix.com> wrote:
On Jul 1, 2014, at 11:57 AM, Tommi Virtanen <tommi.virtanen@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 11:49 AM, Glyph Lefkowitz <glyph@twistedmatrix.com> wrote:
(Also, please be careful, and don't push to the main Twisted repo if you work on Twisted. Github is super obnoxious about mirroring; we can't turn off pull requests and we can't turn off pushes even though it's really supposed to be a read-only mirror right now, and pushes to that repository break our SVN integration.)
I'm no Github expert, but you should be able to just make people be in a non-"Owners" team, and then selectively give that team push access to only the repos you want.
Not only this, I still like the idea of forking from Twisted/ldaptor in my own repo and working on my own branch. When finished, I usually send a merge request upstream, in this case to Twisted/ldaptor. I assume that it would either be accepted or rejected with comments. If this is too much overhead for you, then the below is a good idea and give make us contributors.
I've made you a contributor to that repository, but I recommend that you do this anyway, and (for now) just merge your own PRs after a little while if nobody steps forward to review them. Hopefully some more interested parties will arrive and allow for a nice review-driven process early though :-).
The "Owners" team probably gives non-admin contributors too much power in the first place.
This works by creating a team with 'write access' to twisted/ldaptor. This would make you (Glyph) the gatekeeper (admin access by default) in adding and kicking members out of the group. The rest of the world is technically in the 'read access' team as is the nature of open organizations on github.
This is indeed a better idea.
I'll still need the list of names for that team though ;)
psi29a https://github.com/psi29a
Let me know if I did this right: https://github.com/twisted/ldaptor -glyph
On 2 July 2014 00:45, Glyph Lefkowitz <glyph@twistedmatrix.com> wrote:
I've made you a contributor to that repository, but I recommend that you do this anyway, and (for now) just merge your own PRs after a little while if nobody steps forward to review them. Hopefully some more interested parties will arrive and allow for a nice review-driven process early though :-).
I've initialized the new repo with tv42's repo. It isn't a github fork, but a mirror. I also tagged it with the 0.43 release since that is the last known official release build.
Let me know if I did this right:
https://github.com/twisted/ldaptor
-glyph
You've done is right and I've already github forked it (after I did the above) and started to get down to business. Whenever someone gets the chance, please check this out: https://github.com/twisted/ldaptor/pull/1 The summary/comment pretty much sums up what we've talked about in the list so far. I think once it is merged, it is a pretty good starting place. This has been tested against our project at Amplidata and with only 3 failing tests out of 337, we're doing really so far. Going forward, here are some things I want to tackle: 1) Get those remaining 3 tests (or code it tests) fixed. 2) Follow up with Pypi about the semi-dead Ldaptor 0.53 release 3) Start the PEP8 process on the codebase 4) Help existing debian maintainer to transition to twisted's ldaptor 5) ? ... additional input from you guys would be awesome. :) Cheers, Bret
Hello again, I sent another pull request, this takes care of the last 3 failing tests and opens up an additional 50 tests that also pass now. We're now at 387 tests! https://github.com/twisted/ldaptor/pull/3 It is my recommendation that after this is reviewed and hopfully commited that we make a branch and tag the release as 0.54.0. The reason for the large jump is that antong's last semi-offical release was 0.53 on PyPI. At this point we (myself and anyone else that wants to help) should reach out to downstream projects (PyPI, Debian, and etc.) to make them aware that Ldaptor development is again active. I would also like to (ab)use github's issue tracker and milestones to sort issues into queues. For example, the next milestone would be 0.55 with: https://github.com/twisted/ldaptor/issues/2 as the first real issue to be tracked there. Another issue I'll file shortly will be that we go through the code and start refactoring deprecated code like I did for test_ldiftree.py. Would you mind if I did this or would you rather someone else handle this? Another question is that of documentation. We could use sphinx to handle this to autodoc our API and also include howtos and examples. This can readily be used for html, pdf and man page generation which would be handy for downstream. What does everyone think? Cheers, Bret
On 7 Jul 2014, at 12:23, Bret Curtis wrote:
It is my recommendation that after this is reviewed and hopfully commited that we make a branch and tag the release as 0.54.0. The reason for the large jump is that antong's last semi-offical release was 0.53 on PyPI. At this point we (myself and anyone else that wants to help) should reach out to downstream projects (PyPI, Debian, and etc.) to make them aware that Ldaptor development is again active.
Since ldaptor is a Twisted project now, may I suggest you copy its time-based version numbers? 14.0 has more meaning to itself than 0.54.0.
On 7 Jul 2014, at 18:50, Hynek Schlawack <hs@ox.cx> wrote:
On 7 Jul 2014, at 12:23, Bret Curtis wrote:
It is my recommendation that after this is reviewed and hopfully commited that we make a branch and tag the release as 0.54.0. The reason for the large jump is that antong's last semi-offical release was 0.53 on PyPI. At this point we (myself and anyone else that wants to help) should reach out to downstream projects (PyPI, Debian, and etc.) to make them aware that Ldaptor development is again active.
Since ldaptor is a Twisted project now, may I suggest you copy its time-based version numbers? 14.0 has more meaning to itself than 0.54.0.
Well, Nevow is a “Twisted Project” and it doesn’t — but I agree that it has more meaning. -hawkowl
On Jul 7, 2014, at 4:13 AM, HawkOwl <hawkowl@atleastfornow.net> wrote:
On 7 Jul 2014, at 18:50, Hynek Schlawack <hs@ox.cx> wrote:
On 7 Jul 2014, at 12:23, Bret Curtis wrote:
It is my recommendation that after this is reviewed and hopfully commited that we make a branch and tag the release as 0.54.0. The reason for the large jump is that antong's last semi-offical release was 0.53 on PyPI. At this point we (myself and anyone else that wants to help) should reach out to downstream projects (PyPI, Debian, and etc.) to make them aware that Ldaptor development is again active.
Since ldaptor is a Twisted project now, may I suggest you copy its time-based version numbers? 14.0 has more meaning to itself than 0.54.0.
Well, Nevow is a “Twisted Project” and it doesn’t — but I agree that it has more meaning.
It might not be a bad idea to do this for Nevow too, for that matter. -glyph
On 09:02 pm, glyph@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
On Jul 7, 2014, at 4:13 AM, HawkOwl <hawkowl@atleastfornow.net> wrote:
On 7 Jul 2014, at 18:50, Hynek Schlawack <hs@ox.cx> wrote:
On 7 Jul 2014, at 12:23, Bret Curtis wrote:
It is my recommendation that after this is reviewed and hopfully commited that we make a branch and tag the release as 0.54.0. The reason for the large jump is that antong's last semi-offical release was 0.53 on PyPI. At this point we (myself and anyone else that wants to help) should reach out to downstream projects (PyPI, Debian, and etc.) to make them aware that Ldaptor development is again active.
Since ldaptor is a Twisted project now, may I suggest you copy its time-based version numbers? 14.0 has more meaning to itself than 0.54.0.
Well, Nevow is a “Twisted Project” and it doesn’t — but I agree that it has more meaning.
It might not be a bad idea to do this for Nevow too, for that matter.
It might not be. Now that so many new projects are being added to the github Twisted repository (and particularly, projects that have new contributors), perhaps it is (slightly past) time to set down some of these things officially? Jean-Paul
On Jul 7, 2014, at 2:21 PM, exarkun@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
It might not be. Now that so many new projects are being added to the github Twisted repository (and particularly, projects that have new contributors), perhaps it is (slightly past) time to set down some of these things officially?
I think we should make a list of some suggestions before we try to make that list into an official policy. Date-based version numbers is a good suggestion to start that list with :). -g
I haven't used ldaptor in years, but I have to say I'm really glad to see this happening. Kudos to all.
On 8 Jul 2014, at 5:26, Glyph Lefkowitz <glyph@twistedmatrix.com> wrote:
On Jul 7, 2014, at 2:21 PM, exarkun@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
It might not be. Now that so many new projects are being added to the github Twisted repository (and particularly, projects that have new contributors), perhaps it is (slightly past) time to set down some of these things officially?
I think we should make a list of some suggestions before we try to make that list into an official policy. Date-based version numbers is a good suggestion to start that list with :).
Maybe we need a Request For Comment/PEP-style way of formalising/proposing policy? Django’s doing it as well, and it seems like a nice way of doing it. -hawkowl
On 11:30 am, hawkowl@atleastfornow.net wrote:
On 8 Jul 2014, at 5:26, Glyph Lefkowitz <glyph@twistedmatrix.com> wrote:
On Jul 7, 2014, at 2:21 PM, exarkun@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
It might not be. Now that so many new projects are being added to the github Twisted repository (and particularly, projects that have new contributors), perhaps it is (slightly past) time to set down some of these things officially?
I think we should make a list of some suggestions before we try to make that list into an official policy. Date-based version numbers is a good suggestion to start that list with :).
Maybe we need a Request For Comment/PEP-style way of formalising/proposing policy? Django’s doing it as well, and it seems like a nice way of doing it.
I don't see this as the necessary conclusion. We're not arguing about what the policy should be yet. I'm just saying it should be written down in one place - not smeared out across 10 years of mailing list archives. Jean-Paul
Right, so from what I read here then our official release to the world will be 14.0, provided that Travis is green before 2015. ;) Sound good? Cheers, Bret On 7 July 2014 23:26, Glyph Lefkowitz <glyph@twistedmatrix.com> wrote:
On Jul 7, 2014, at 2:21 PM, exarkun@twistedmatrix.com wrote:
It might not be. Now that so many new projects are being added to the github Twisted repository (and particularly, projects that have new contributors), perhaps it is (slightly past) time to set down some of these things officially?
I think we should make a list of some suggestions before we try to make that list into an official policy. Date-based version numbers is a good suggestion to start that list with :).
-g
_______________________________________________ Twisted-Python mailing list Twisted-Python@twistedmatrix.com http://twistedmatrix.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/twisted-python
On Jul 9, 2014, at 12:27 AM, Bret Curtis <bret.curtis@amplidata.com> wrote:
Travis is green before 2015
This sounds like an excellent campaign slogan. (Also I just merged the PR to turn Travis green. Lots of missing entries from the build matrix now though: good hunting to you all.) -glyph
participants (7)
-
Bret Curtis -
exarkun＠twistedmatrix.com -
Glyph -
Glyph Lefkowitz
-
HawkOwl -
Hynek Schlawack -
Kevin Horn