This PR imports recent old history of JSONAlchemy from the Invenio package. The full explanation is given in border commits:
jsonalchemy: old history import ends here
* This commit completes the import of recent JSONAlchemy development
history from the Invenio source code repository. The next commit will
make `jsonalchemy` into a truly standalone package. See
f77ec0b5272e87c3d330aef771cbb836c982beb7 for more explanations.
Signed-off-by: Tibor Simko <tibor.simko@cern.ch>
[...]
jsonalchemy: old history import begins here
* JSONALchemy was being previously developed inside the Invenio digital
repository software package. This commit starts migration of its
recent development history from the `invenio` repository to this
standalone `jsonalchemy` repository. This is mostly of historical
interest, should some changes be required.
* NOTE Before being nicknamed JSONAlchemy, the module started its life
as a BibField module of Invenio. This development history is not
transferred here; please refer to the history of Invenio at
<http://github.com/inveniosoftware/invenio> if you like to access it.
* NOTE The code is migrated "as is", hence not runnable out of the box.
Please look for a later commit, headlined "jsonalchemy: import old
history ends here", which will end the import of the historical code.
The subsequent commit, entitled "jsonalchemy: initial package
release", will make the JSONAlchemy code fully runnable as a
standalone package.
Signed-off-by: Tibor Simko <tibor.simko@cern.ch>
To discuss: (1) is it OK to disregard older BibField history, making the import not fully complete; (2) is it worth it to have this (recent or complete) history imported, e.g. besides authorship questions, what is the probability of diving to the old code.
Personal stance: I think it is worth it, but I'm not sure about importing only recent history vs importing full history. (which would require some more git dancing due to merge commits and file renames)
This PR imports recent old history of JSONAlchemy from the Invenio package. The full explanation is given in border commits:
To discuss: (1) is it OK to disregard older BibField history, making the import not fully complete; (2) is it worth it to have this (recent or complete) history imported, e.g. besides authorship questions, what is the probability of diving to the old code.
Personal stance: I think it is worth it, but I'm not sure about importing only recent history vs importing full history. (which would require some more git dancing due to merge commits and file renames)