-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 130
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Migrating to env-logger-rs
GitHub org
#163
Comments
I'd be happy to help maintain the project :)
Why? |
@jplatte From my personal point of view, I do like that it is closer integrated into GitHub as other CI services. It doesn't require additional rights management or hacks like some other CI that do not pick up on the CI is mostly done in #164. There are some open points left though. |
This is pretty much one of the reasons I don't like it 😅 It increases vendor lock-in.
All of this seems irrelevant for |
I totally get that. In a perfect world I'd be hosting my own git servers and CI runners using GitLab for example. But I do think that it makes collaboration easier. These are my two cents: A lot of new projects just use GA as it's provided by the same people, the integration is nicer and tighter that way. Newer people will probably learn GA first before using something like Travis or Appveyor nowadays. And for exactly those people collaboration is way easier that way, which is one of the goals I try to reach with open source software.
I wouldn't say irrelevant. Back when I used Travis before moving to GitLab only the owner of the repository could do stuff over there for example. And each change to the configuration (adding new environment variables for example) has to be done through the owner itself. This is just one example though that happened to me often enough to be annoying. Especially when the owner isn't active anymore but other people have push rights. There are probably pro and cons in both directions :) I also do use GA for all my GitHub projects. It's just easier, more convenient and writing custom actions is A LOT easier in my opinion than writing some weird bash scripts like I did during my GitLab days. |
@jplatte That's a fair question. My motivations for GitHub actions are:
It's always nice to be mindful of vendor-lock-in, but since all CI does is run |
I feel exactly the opposite way. From my perspective GA is overengineered, under-documented, and I've generally had a bad time using it. Bash is not a perfect language by any means, but at least you can easily run it locally and there's tons of resources about it.
I thought travis also supported Windows now? Anyway, I think I'm clearly on the loosing side of this here with the amount of projects switching to GA already and both of you wanting the switch, so carry on. I'm still interested in helping with CI-unrelated maintenance tasks :D |
@jplatte Are you still interested in maintaining the crate with us? I can send an invite over in that case :) |
@sirwindfield KodrAus already invited me on Monday ;) |
Btw, maybe a logo might be cool to have! Anything is probably better looking than the default GitHub one 😄 I did one in Affinity, if you guys like it I can add it to the organization. Just an idea though :p |
Interest in bors? Might be overkill tbh, because the CI runs again when you rebase the PR. But on the other hand, we doun't have to rebase ourselves then. I can setup badges and clean the readme a little bit. I will add issue templates as well (bug/feature) so people can choose one when they create an issue. Out of experience however, 99% of the people just ctrl-a delete it so 🤷 |
Concerning PR merges. I’d like to propose that each pr is reviewed by one of the maintainers. Meaning that no one merges without a review of another one (not like i did today :( ) |
The publish rights for crates is probably have to be provided by the original maintainer to us. Not sure if you already have some @KodrAus |
So it turns out I'm not actually an individual owner of the crate so can't add our Publishers team to it. @sebasmagri when you have a chance would you be able to run:
in the repo to give the team publish rights? |
ping @sebasmagri :) it would be great to have a new release of env_logger. |
The publish right have been updated so that is no longer blocked on a single person. I'll look into the currently open issues and PRs and might release a new version soon (unless somebody objects). |
Done. It's two release, 0.8.0 + 0.8.1, since I first forgot to update the repository links as noted above in the todo list. I haven't created a separate GitHub release for 0.8.1 since it doesn't contain any actual code changes. I hope this works for everyone. |
Since there was immeditately complains about the missing tag / changelog for 0.8.1, I did now add one 😅 |
Hello, |
Oh, I'm sorry. The tags seem to be there, but just not listed on this page. My mistake? |
That page shows all the tags for me. Either way I'd be happy to copy the GitHub releases info into |
Now that I've cleared my mind: you are correct, although the tags are not in reverse chronological order, so 0.6.2 is on page 2... strange github. o.O Cheers, and my sincere apologies for this nuisance. |
GitHub sorts them by the date they have been created. I tagged some missing version tags on the 24th July, that's why they show up in between :) |
We've since moved to |
I see @sebasmagri @sfackler you seem to be owners of env-logger on crates.io, can one of you remove the publish access for |
And can you add |
In #159 we brought up the possibility of moving
env_logger
into a dedicated GitHub org. I've gone ahead and created one at https://github.com/env-logger-rsLet's use this issue to track the things we need to do to get the migration ball rolling.
TODO
crates.io
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: