RAD Game Tools License Concern - Immediate Action Required

CyanWorlds.com Engine Project Management
User avatar
JWPlatt
Member
Posts: 1099
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 7:32 pm
Location: Everywhere, all at once

Re: RAD Game Tools License Concern - Immediate Action Requir

Post by JWPlatt » Sun Dec 16, 2012 10:11 pm

I was resigned to deleting the CWE repos and replacing them with the rebase, knowing we would loose all the PR and inline comments. Rarified is checking into using the PR API to get that info into Fisheye on Foundry. If you have hope of keeping all that history, it's worth pursuing. If you could rephrase that into a simpler question, it might help support staff understand it better. It's also generic enough a question to also ask support yourself, though it might be good to keep the question in the context of this issue so they understand the purpose. We could compare answers because support invariably comes back with differences depending on whom you ask. I just meant contact me directly with support questions about securing CWE's downstream repos on BB, but now I understand your comment better. I'd be happy to include it in the support conversation.
Perfect speed is being there.

Christian Walther
Member
Posts: 294
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:54 am

Re: RAD Game Tools License Concern - Immediate Action Requir

Post by Christian Walther » Mon Dec 17, 2012 9:42 pm

JWPlatt wrote:I was resigned to deleting the CWE repos and replacing them with the rebase, knowing we would loose all the PR and inline comments.
No, don’t delete the repositories! That way, as you say, we would lose everything (probably). If we just push the new revisions and strip the old ones, we only lose the diffs on pull requests (and possibly inline comments, I don’t know, but we shouldn’t have a lot of those as they were only introduced recently), but keep the discussion comments.
JWPlatt wrote:Rarified is checking into using the PR API to get that info into Fisheye on Foundry.
I’m curious if he finds a way – when I briefly looked at the API docs, it seemed to me that for some reason there is no API to get pull requests, only one to get pull request comments.
JWPlatt wrote:If you could rephrase that into a simpler question, it might help support staff understand it better. It's also generic enough a question to also ask support yourself, though it might be good to keep the question in the context of this issue so they understand the purpose. We could compare answers because support invariably comes back with differences depending on whom you ask. I just meant contact me directly with support questions about securing CWE's downstream repos on BB, but now I understand your comment better. I'd be happy to include it in the support conversation.
The question I was planning to ask support was something like the following:
Due to a copyright violation discovered late in the game, we had to rewrite history of our project https://bitbucket.org/OpenUru_org/cwe-ou, using “hg convert” to delete certain files from all revisions. This naturally changed all revision IDs. If we push the rewritten history to the Bitbucket repository and all its forks and strip the old history now (we haven’t yet, but it’s ready at https://bitbucket.org/cwalther/cwe-ou-nobink), that means that all our received pull requests would cease to display diffs, because they are still connected to the removed old revisions.

Do you have a suggestion for us on what we could do in order to retain the pull request diffs? Is there a way we can switch the PRs to the new (rewritten) revisions ourselves (in my experiments with a dummy repo, I couldn’t find one)? Can you switch them for us? I could prepare a list of pull requests with old and new revisions, and there are only 26 of them so it should be doable manually.

I imagine this situation has occurred before on Bitbucket, but I cannot find anything about it in the documentation.
If you think it wouldn’t cause any confusion, I can go ahead and submit the request.

I still don’t quite understand what it is, if not this, that you are conversing with Bitbucket support about. What do you mean by “securing CWE's downstream repos on BB”?

User avatar
Hoikas
Member
Posts: 286
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 8:38 pm

Re: RAD Game Tools License Concern - Immediate Action Requir

Post by Hoikas » Wed Dec 19, 2012 6:41 pm

Github support has pulled the trigger and made the offending repositories private and sent out an explanatory email on or behalf. The only thing they could not do was take care of Dhelayan's troll repository. RAD will need to send a DMCA takedown notice to get rid of that one.
Image

User avatar
JWPlatt
Member
Posts: 1099
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 7:32 pm
Location: Everywhere, all at once

Re: RAD Game Tools License Concern - Immediate Action Requir

Post by JWPlatt » Wed Dec 19, 2012 8:39 pm

Atlassian (Bitbucket) did their part for this on Monday. They found all the repository owners had already complied, the few that there are, but sent the notice to all owners anyway as due diligence.

Thanks much for your help with Github, Adam.
Perfect speed is being there.

Christian Walther
Member
Posts: 294
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:54 am

Re: RAD Game Tools License Concern - Immediate Action Requir

Post by Christian Walther » Thu Dec 27, 2012 8:43 pm

I have been working with a nice Bitbucket support representative, trying to find a way to retain all information from the old pull requests in the rewritten repository. It looks like we have now found a way: We don’t push the rewritten history into the original repository, but create a new one for it, then recreate all 26 pull requests there, and finally he can copy the comment discussions over from the old pull requests to the recreated ones. That way we both retain the discussions on the pull requests (which in my opinion are very important for traceability of the project development) as well as have the pull requests connected to the new commits so that they can show the proper diffs and open/merged/declined status. We have tentatively done that with the first two pull requests, and it’s looking good.

Recreating the pull requests will require the cooperation of all past senders of pull requests, which are Skoader, boq, Lyrositor, Hoikas, and me. To faithfully recreate the pull request structure, all steps will have to be executed in a precise sequence (the same sequence as things were done in the original repository). I am now working on writing detailed instructions on who needs to do what in which order for that. Carrying it out will probably be easiest and quickest by working on IRC (#writers or #OpenURU) between me and one or more of the people named above at a time. It will probably be a few hours of work in total, spread out over several days as dictated by the availability of the people involved.

If all four of the named pull request senders are willing to participate in such an effort, and nobody else interested has any objections, I suggest that we go ahead this way. It’s a bit of work, but I consider it worth it. I hope to have at least part of the instructions done tomorrow so you can get a better idea of what’s involved.

The alternative would be to push the new history into the old repository and strip the old history, and the same in the pull request source repositories. According to my experiments, that would result in the old pull requests displaying no diffs, displaying no descriptions (although that in my opinion is a bug in Bitbucket and may be fixed some day), appearing open (even those that were actually merged) or, if we explicitly close them after that, declined; but still displaying the comment discussions. We could live with that, in my opinion, as the most important thing, the comment discussions, would still be there, but it would look a little messy.

Christian Walther
Member
Posts: 294
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:54 am

Re: RAD Game Tools License Concern - Immediate Action Requir

Post by Christian Walther » Thu Dec 27, 2012 10:57 pm

Alright, here’s the part of the instructions I have so far: http://cw.kolleegium.ch/misc/prrecreation.html. It’s mostly done up to about step 29, but still subject to change. Look, don’t touch. I hope it’s comprehensible. That should give you an idea of what’s to come.

Christian Walther
Member
Posts: 294
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:54 am

Re: RAD Game Tools License Concern - Immediate Action Requir

Post by Christian Walther » Sat Dec 29, 2012 10:41 pm

My instructions are now complete except for the missing description of pull request #19 (step 56). We have not found a way of getting that description out of Bitbucket. I have mentioned that to my support contact and hope he’ll be able to read it directly from the database for us, but I don’t expect a response before Jan 3rd (assuming Atlassian observes the same holidays as we do here in Switzerland). After getting the okay from everyone involved on IRC, I’d like to start sooner than that while people are still available. We can just stop at step 56 until we get an answer, and in the worst case make up a new description. My experiments indicate that pull request descriptions are freely editable now as long as the PR is open, so we could also continue with a dummy description and edit the definite one in later.

There is still a bit of preparation to do for me, I will ping people on #writers when their participation is requested.

Christian Walther
Member
Posts: 294
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:54 am

Re: RAD Game Tools License Concern - Immediate Action Requir

Post by Christian Walther » Wed Jan 16, 2013 6:49 pm

Current report of non-progress: On January 3, we completed recreation of the pull requests in the new repository (thanks again to everyone involved, that went very smoothly!), and I notified my Bitbucket support contact that he could proceed with copying the comments over from the old repository. After long silence, I got the following disappointing response last Friday:
Bitbucket Support wrote:Sorry, Christian, but I'm not going to have time to work on this going forward.

The engineering team at Bitbucket does rotations on support to help Marcus Bertrand [Atlassian], so perhaps a different Bitbucket engineer can take a look at this at some point, but I'm not sure of the likely hood of that (perhaps low).
My response was
Christian Walther wrote:Thanks for letting me know. I was about to follow up, wondering about the long silence. This is unfortunate, so close to completion. Wouldn’t it simply be a matter of running the script again that you have already written? If you can’t, maybe the next engineer on the rotation can do that quickly, or you can put us in touch with someone at Bitbucket/Atlassian who can?

If there really is no way to complete the copying of the comments soon, I will try to add one comment to every new pull request containing a copy of the entire comment discussion of the old one, so we keep the record and can get back to work on the repository. Copying the comments is really the important part, I’m happy to wait longer for the answers to my further questions or do without answers at all if need be.

Thank you anyway for all you have done so far, also from the rest of the OpenUru.org team! I was impressed to receive this level of customer support as a user of a free service.
I have not heard anything back as of today, therefore I’m going to start adding the quoted comment discussions, as described. I have it mostly automated, so that should be done within a few days.

After that, I will make a pull request with the proposed fix that makes things compile and run again after the removal of the Bink files, and I propose merging that before anything else. After that, we can look into getting the CWE and CWE-ou-minkata repositories up to date, and resume the discussion of how to proceed with CWE-ou.

User avatar
JWPlatt
Member
Posts: 1099
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 7:32 pm
Location: Everywhere, all at once

Re: RAD Game Tools License Concern - Immediate Action Requir

Post by JWPlatt » Thu Jan 17, 2013 2:55 am

I contacted the Atlassian Director of Developer Relations. He's been very helpful and generous throughout this process to make things happen. They are going to attempt to copy the non-line comments from our old PRs to our new ones soon. They are not going to be able to copy over the in-line comments. He says only one PR is affected by the in-line comments, which sounds strange because I would have thought there were many more, but it's not relevant at this point anyway. They recommend we manually copy them over, which Christian is set to do, and/or take a static archive (PDF or HTML).
Perfect speed is being there.

Christian Walther
Member
Posts: 294
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:54 am

Re: RAD Game Tools License Concern - Immediate Action Requir

Post by Christian Walther » Thu Jan 17, 2013 11:51 am

Thanks JW, that’s helpful!
JWPlatt wrote:He says only one PR is affected by the in-line comments, which sounds strange because I would have thought there were many more, but it's not relevant at this point anyway.
This is correct. Only PR 23 has line comments, and quoting them in a standard comment is no big deal, as the diff is quite short and it is relatively obvious which line is meant.

Post Reply

Return to “Management”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest