Re: Proposal to deploy GitLab on gnome.org

[Arun Raghavan <arun accosted net>]

On 17 May 2017 at 13:56, Carlos Soriano <csoriano protonmail com> wrote:
> Hey Arun,
>
> Glad to hear you are positive about the proposal!
>
>  Let me answer your points:
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: Proposal to deploy GitLab on gnome.org
> Local Time: May 17, 2017 7:32 AM
> UTC Time: May 17, 2017 5:32 AM
> From: arun accosted net
> To: Carlos Soriano <csoriano protonmail com>
> desktop-devel-list gnome org <desktop-devel-list gnome org>
>
> On 17 May 2017 at 03:57, Carlos Soriano via desktop-devel-list
> <desktop-devel-list gnome org> wrote:
> > Hello Mattias,
> >
> > Thanks for sharing your thoughs!
> >
> > Your concern is about using fast forward merge. Yes, we raised this
> > concern
> > as the top most important for us, and as we mention in the wiki we have
> > good
> > news, GitLab team is willing to strongly consider making fast forward
> > merge
> > to CE if GNOME decides to switch to GitLab.
> >
> > Don't worry much about this one :)
>
> Thank you for taking this up. While I share some concerns voiced on
> this thread, overall, I think it is a good thing for us to be trying
> to move to tools that make our lives easier as well as lower the bar
> for new contributors who are used to the Github-esque workflow.
>
> My first note to folks who are concerned about GitLab being an evil
> semi-closed project would be to look at the repository at
> https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce -- having shared these
> concerns in the past, I feel a lot more positive looking at degree to
> which external contributions are encouraged.
>
>
> Yes, as mentioned in a different thread, more than 50% is by community.
> Of course we had the same concerns in the past But then we explored the tool
> and the team more, realized that in the CE repo there ara quite a lot of
> non-gitlab contributions, read more about them and their actions in the past
> (like moving EE features to CE based on user input), and talked with them.
> Now we are pretty confident about it.
>
>
> The things I worry about are the features that are in the EE and not
> in CE that I think will be important for us either now, or down the
> line:
>
> * Git hooks -- either admins with file system access need to manage
> these for projects because the web interface to do this is EE-only
>
>
> This is not a problem really. We were doing it already with Bugzilla/cgit.
>
>
> * Automatic rebase for fast forward commits -- Carlos mentioned that
> this might be something that'll just be part of the CE
>
>
> Yes, no worries about this one.
>
>
> * Single-sign-on with the remaining GNOME account infra -- maybe this
> will just be something we'll have to maintain ourselves
>
>
> Care to expand? You mean using the gnome account to login? If so, that's
> already possible.

I looked at the LDAP support item in the CE vs. EE page, but if it's
solved already, that's awesome.

> * Issue templates -- again, this seems like a basic feature for this
> kind of platform so we can get more meaningful bug reports to start
> with
>
>
> This is on CE.
> https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/user/project/description_templates.html
> You might remembered from the past, before 8.1, when it was EE.
> Test our gitlab test instance as outlined in the wiki so you know what's the
> current status of the tool, since it changed and added quite a few things in
> the last months that otherwise we would have ponder much more if it makes
> sense for us.

I was looking at the CE vs. EE page -- I guess that needs to be updated.

> * Multiple issue boards per project -- I haven't used the issue
> boards yet, but this seemed like a rather artificial limitation rather
> than an actual feature differentiated in EE
>
>
> Not sure how this is necessary for us, compared to what we have in Bugzilla.
> Of course this would be useful, but the frame of the problem is more about
> what we have now vs what we could have.
>
>
> Other than the hooks which might be an immediate concern, I guess the
> rest of these aren't a step down from where we are, so if we have an
> idea of how to deal with these in the future, that's good enough.
>
>
> Template issues and ff merge would have been a step down. Not sure template
> issues would have been extremely important, but still. But as mentioned,
> template issues in is CE since a few months ago, and fast forward merge
> shouldn't worry you :)

Well, that's two more thumbs up from me, then. :-)

-- Arun