search

Sage-Bionetworks / synAnnotationUtils

Apache License 2.0
4 stars 2 forks source link

Merge repo into synapseAnnotations #29

Closed jaeddy closed 6 years ago

jaeddy commented 7 years ago

After some recent discussion related to organizing the synapseAnnotations repo, some of us concluded that maintaining two repos for annotation related work is probably redundant. We can merge one git repository into another in a way that preserves file/commit history (check out this post for an example; however, there are a few steps we'd want to take care of to help the process go more smoothly:

  1. Get consensus: before doing anything, I want to make sure that everyone on the annotations team is on board with this plan.
  2. Clean up branches in this repo: It's possible to merge individual feature branches, but ideally I would just worry about merging synAnnotationUtils/master. That means if anyone has in-progress work in active branches, we should try to get those changes committed and merged.
  3. Dry run the merge: I'll fork synapseAnnotations and test the process by merging this repo into my (safe) fork. This will provide a reasonable preview of the final result and highlight any potentially problematic steps.
  4. Agree on a target time window: Once we have a clear idea of how the merge should proceed, and outstanding changes in this repo have been resolved, it'd be helpful if we could set a time to "freeze" this repo and start the process. I (hopefully) only need an hour or two to get things merged and open a pull request in synapseAnnotations.

Anything I've missed? I imagine that @kdaily, @kkdang, @xindiguo, @teslajoy, and @ychae will be the key contributors who will need to coordinate plans on this end.

kkdang commented 7 years ago

So at one point, we all concluded that separate repos would be better, I think because we wanted to facilitate use of annotationsUtils as a package that users would install.

Let's make sure we are certain about undoing our previous decision before we do it.

sgosline commented 7 years ago

I never understood the previous decision - but I think downloading a few extra jsons with a package is not the end of the world and will make it easier to encourage use.

jaeddy commented 7 years ago

@kkdang see discussion here.

And yeah, re: step (1) in my list — definitely won't do anything until we're all on the same page.

kdaily commented 6 years ago

Seems that we're all ok with maintaining two separate packages. I think the usage is defined separately enough now to go ahead with that. Recommending closing, won't fix.