Re: Merging git history for jws-2020

I definitely lean towards transferring ownership of repo (similar to how we
transfer things into CCG when they become a work item) when it exists
unless there is a strong reason not to.

Mike Prorock
CTO, Founder
https://mesur.io/



On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 11:19 AM Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
wrote:

> On 7/19/22 10:53 AM, Ivan Herman wrote:
> > Well… I have just created the vc-jws-2020 repository. Do you want to
> remove
> > that one then in favour of a transferred repository? Or do you want to
> run
> > them in parallel?
>
> Looks like we have disagreement among the Editors on the appropriate
> course of
> action here. We should discuss and get the WG/Editors to weigh in.
>
> My suggestion is that the current path creates far more work (now and over
> the
> long term) than necessary for the Editors, so we should optimize for the
> thing
> that preserves the most history (including commits, issues, and PRs).
>
> > For now, I would prefer to do a merge through some git magic (and be
> > careful next time…).
>
> Just doing a merge via git magic only pulls in the commits.
>
> Someone will then have to go through every repo and manually transfer every
> open issue, and cross-link those issues between the CCG repo and the WG
> repo... and after that's done, we still lose history on all the closed
> issues
> as well as the PR discussion history.
>
> What is being proposed is more work, resulting in a lossy process that
> makes
> everyone's job harder over time.
>
> We don't need to make things harder on ourselves... let's just migrate the
> repos in their entirety.
>
> -- manu
>
> --
> Manu Sporny - https://www.linkedin.com/in/manusporny/
> Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
> News: Digital Bazaar Announces New Case Studies (2021)
> https://www.digitalbazaar.com/
>
>
>