Why you have not done a transfer directly the repository instead of a fork?

tine-groupware / tine

tine groupware main repository

https://www.tine-groupware.de

GNU Affero General Public License v3.0

12 stars 2 forks source link

Why you have not done a transfer directly the repository instead of a fork? #5

Closed Neustradamus closed 9 months ago

Neustradamus commented 9 months ago

Dear @tine-groupware, @pschuele,

Why you have not done a transfer instead of a fork of the original repository?

https://github.com/tine20/tine20

Thanks in advance.

pschuele commented 9 months ago

hi Neustradamus, I'm also not quite convinced that the forking was a good idea. I remember that we had reasons for this, but it does not make sense to me now either... I think, we should unfork (https://stackoverflow.com/questions/38831301/how-to-un-fork-the-github-repository). @byteplow do you have an opinion on this?

Neustradamus commented 9 months ago

The solution is to unarchive the original place, merge all in upstream.

Now there are two possibilities after the first previous step.

First:

Move all repositories from "tine-groupware" into "tine20" original organization
Rename this current organization to another name temp
Rename the original organization with the "tine-groupware", and rename the current "temp" organization to "tine20"
Edit the new "tine20" description to inform people to go "tine-groupware" organization

Second:

Remove the current fork or move into another place
Move all repositories from "tine20" to "tine-groupware" organization
Update "tine20" description to inform people to go "tine-groupware" organization

byteplow commented 9 months ago

Definitely unhappy with forking. We should unfork. But I am not sure we should transfer the repo. We had some reasons not to. But I do not really remember what they were. @pschuele let us discuss this on wensday. One of the reasons was to lose the old issues. A lot of them are outdated. But there should be a better way to solve this. Like closing them with a stall bot. Also not a grade, but better than just ignoring / deleting them all.

pschuele commented 9 months ago

we'll just detach the fork. the other repos from the original namespace will be transferred/archived soon.

pschuele commented 9 months ago

fork as been detached. thx @githubsupport

Neustradamus commented 9 months ago

@pschuele: I think that the best solution is to unarchive the original place, and merge all changes in upstream...

Why? Please look "Watching", "Fork", "Star" parts.

Neustradamus commented 9 months ago

@pschuele: Very bad point...

Can you:

Rename temporarly, this tine to tine-temp?
Rename https://github.com/tine20/tine20 to https://github.com/tine20/tine Transfer https://github.com/tine20/tine to here?

Add all the new changes into https://github.com/tine-groupware/tine-temp to https://github.com/tine-groupware/tine

Transfer the "Issues" into the good repo and remove the temp repository.

Thanks in advance.

Neustradamus commented 9 months ago

I was very simple but I am not sure that github support can re-attach you now...

pschuele commented 8 months ago

I think, it is ok like this. the new repo's main branch differs very much from the old main. it is also ok to have a fresh start with the issues. it's only a minor inconvenience to lose the watches/forks/stars. but we hope that the community finds their way to the new repo eventually.