I'd like some developer feedback on reorganizing the GitHub repositories.
For the most part the
https://github.com/cryptonomex/ organization seems to be no longer maintained. Specifically there is no one that is maintaining issues and pull requests in
https://github.com/cryptonomex/graphene and
https://github.com/cryptonomex/fc.
@svk is still maintaining
https://github.com/cryptonomex/graphene-ui but I think there is a possibility he will be abandoning it soon based on his approved worker proposal here:
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,23645.0.htmlI've already started a new fc fork here
https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-fc which merges all applicable updates and pull requests from
https://github.com/cryptonomex/fc and
https://github.com/steemit/fc. BitShares will use the bitshares-fc fork moving forward.
I'd like to propose a merge of
https://github.com/cryptonomex/graphene and
https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-2. The main reasons for doing so would be to bring the issue tracker into the BitShares organization where myself and other BitShares developers can maintain it, and also to avoid confusion about which of multiple issue trackers and forks BitShares users and contributors should work with.
Due to the way GitHub works, in practice such a merge would essentially involve deleting the current bitshares-2 repository, moving and renaming the graphene repository to take its place, and then restoring all missing branches, tags, and releases from the previous bitshares-2 repository into the new one.
This would also effectively mean that BitShares would become the "reference" Graphene implementation and there would be no more "pure" Graphene project. I think this would be fine, because it can be seen from the current diff between graphene and bitshares-2 at
https://github.com/cryptonomex/graphene/compare/master...bitshares:bitshares?w=1 that Graphene already contains "hardfork" code as though it were already part of BitShares, and that it is already missing a number of patches that BitShares contains since nobody is maintaining it. If desired, somebody could maintain a branch downstream of BitShares that removes hardforking code, etc. that would represent a clean Graphene. I would likely do this to begin with as there are still differences for example in the testing infrastructure in Graphene vs BitShares which still need to be fixed.
Performing such a merge would also require agreement from Cryptonomex, whom I cannot speak for. If they do not want to do this or it is otherwise undesirable, an alternative would be to use the
https://github-issue-mover.appspot.com/ tool to copy all issues from the graphene repo into the bitshares-2 repo. This would still leave the upstream Graphene repo and issue tracker in place though, which could still be confusing for users and contributors. It could be a reasonable middle ground if perhaps the upstream graphene issue tracker was disabled afterwards to help avoid confusion.
Any thoughts are appreciated.
@abit @dannotestein @kenCode @svk @xeroc