[Mesa-dev] Gitlab migration
jason at jlekstrand.net
Thu May 24 01:23:14 UTC 2018
On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 5:49 PM, Jordan Justen <jordan.l.justen at intel.com>
> On 2018-05-23 15:16:58, wrote:
> > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 5:48 PM, Jordan Justen
> > <jordan.l.justen at intel.com> wrote:
> > > Why can this only be done with gitlab?
> > I'm not directly involved w/ decision to move things to gitlab, but that
> > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/freedesktop/freedesktop/wikis/home
> > does provide some rational under the "Why migrate to GitLab?" section.
> > There might be a better writeup from the fd.o admins somewhere, but
> > tl;dr version is to ease burden on admins and to eventually reduce the
> > physical fd.o infrastructure to just the mail server with everything
> > else cloud hosted.
> > For mesa, I'd prefer to stick to the email based workflow (which is
> > still an option). And not sure about wiki, other than that it can't
> > be worse than the current random and out of date gpu/mesa related wiki
> > pages that already exist.
> I'm skeptical that gitlab wikis will solve content issues. :)
> > And I'm not strongly tied to bugzilla vs gitlab's issue tracking.
> Another project I'm involved with had a contingency that swore
> github's "issues" were completely inadequate compared to bugzilla,
> which is to say that I don't think there is consensus on this point.
> For that (smaller) project, I thought github's issues were fine
> compared to bugzilla. For (the larger) Mesa project, I'm not so sure.
Agreed. The gitlab/github issue system has some scaling problems. The
tagging system isn't as good as bugzilla's categorization. Also, the
ability to move bugs back and forth between mesa and kernel is a pretty
killer feature. Then again, the ability to tag a bug as "blocks 18.3"
might be a nicer than tracker bugs.
> > Afaui cgit will remain, so if you don't like the github/gitlab UI,
> > you are mostly free to ignore it.
> That is not quite the feeling I was getting from daniels on irc. Seems
> like they'd be looking to drop cgit as soon as they can. It was a vibe
> of yeah, sure, we can keep running that if needed, but we don't want
I think (Daniel can correct me if I'm wrong) that cgit falls under the
category of "mostly harmless" so they can keep it working but those of us
who are gitlab fan-boys don't really see a point. :-P
> > And if changing the push URL for mesa is the only real downside for
> > making life easier for the admins, then I don't really see the
> > problem.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the mesa-dev