Migrating Wayland & Weston to GitLab

[Ucan, Emre (ADITG/ESB)]

Hi Daniel,

I will be happy to use MRs over emails.

Best regards

Emre Ucan
Engineering Software Base (ADITG/ESB)

Tel. +49 5121 49 6937

> -----Original Message-----
> From: wayland-devel [mailto:wayland-devel-
> bounces at lists.freedesktop.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Stone
> Sent: Dienstag, 5. Juni 2018 12:34
> To: Erik De Rijcke <derijcke.erik at gmail.com>
> Cc: wayland <wayland-devel at lists.freedesktop.org>
> Subject: Re: Migrating Wayland & Weston to GitLab
> 
> Hi Erik,
> 
> On 31 May 2018 at 09:36, Erik De Rijcke <derijcke.erik at gmail.com> wrote:
> > First of all I'd like to say that the move to Gitlab makes me really happy
> > \o/! It will definitely  lower the contribution barrier for a lot of people
> > (including me!) as things are now far more accessible, visible and overall
> > easier to manage.
> >
> > Which brings me to a remark/question on how merge requests are done. Is
> > there any plan to allow/move merge requests to Gitlab? Having a central
> > point of all things code related would really make things clear and visible,
> > and overall easier to contribute.
> > Being able to utilize Gitlab, manage your account, create your own fork and
> > then having to do a git-send-email would really defeat the point of the
> > whole move to Gitlab imho.
> >
> > Anyway, just my 2 cents. Very glad to see this Gitlab thing moving forward!
> 
> Personally, I'd like to use MRs for at least Weston development. I'm
> much happier reviewing them there than mail, and although the workflow
> isn't perfect, mail certainly isn't either.
> 
> Some other people said they preferred a mail workflow for
> wayland-protocols. That does make a little more sense to me, though if
> Weston moves to GitLab, then it would make wayland-protocols the odd
> one out for protocol development: AGL using Gerrit review,
> Enlightenment/EFL using Phabricator review, GENIVI using Gerrit
> review, Mutter/GTK+ using GNOME GitLab MRs, KDE using Phabricator
> review, Qt using Gerrit review, Tizen using a mix of Gerrit and
> Phabricator, Weston using fd.o GitLab MRs, and wlc/wlroots using
> GitHub review. But our volume of protocol review is small enough that
> it's probably not a massive deal.
> 
> Similarly, I have a preference for using MRs for the core Wayland
> repo, but again we don't have a super high volume of patches right
> now.
> 
> Using MRs would also allow us to hook up CI pipelines so we could get
> fast feedback on whether the basic build and checks succeeded, which I
> think is pretty helpful given the number of times we've broken
> distcheck lately.
> 
> What do others think?
> 
> Cheers,
> Daniel
> _______________________________________________
> wayland-devel mailing list
> wayland-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel