yade-dev team mailing list archive

[Klaus Thoeni <klaus.thoeni@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Bruno,

thanks for taking the initiative here.

I have also used GitLab over the last year and I can only say positive
things (especially not owned by Microsoft). If you asked me it is probably
time to move everything (incl. code, Q&A, bug tracking etc.) to one single
platform and to leave Launchpad and Github behind. Not sure if this is
feasible. Yes, this would involve a bit of adaptation by some devs but I
can only see benefits having everything on one platform.

I terms of branching, I think this should be kept flexible. I think
branches make sense if you work on major changes. However, I still think
main devs should be able to push directly to the trunk, obviously with care
;-)

Cheers
Klaus


On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 5:54 AM Bruno Chareyre <
bruno.chareyre@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Hi devs,
> This is an announcement (1) and call for opinions (2).
>
> (1)  We will be migrating the integration framework to GitLab.com soon.
> That is: the config of buildbot, doc generation, and packaging will be
> using gitlab and will be hosted on gitlab.com [1], while hardware
> ressources will be provided locally by 3SR and/or Gricad's Gitlab [2].
> It should increase flexibility and decrease maintainance issues.
> Rémi made most of the work already (thank you!). Curious about it? You
> can check [3].
> The switch could happen in a couple months.
>
> _______
> (2)
> GitLab.com could also host the master branch in replacement of
> GitHub.com. It is not required though, and there is no problem to keep
> it on GitHub (like we kept bug tracking on launchpad after moving master
> to github), or not. This is open question to me. Migrating a branch is
> easy to do and easy to revert, so there is no technical constraint on
> us. It just needs to decide if we want to keep github or adopt gitlab
> for the source code (or both...).
>
> If source code was migrated, same question for bug tracking and answers?
>
> Whatever is decided for the above, the migration is also a good
> opportunity to think about the branch management model. Are we happy
> with it?
> Currently we have a centralized usage of a distributed CVS. Most
> contributors push to master directly  with strictly no pre-assessement
> of the contributions. Another possible (and classical) model would be to
> only accept merge requests from other branches. Which can have
> advantages, namely: easier to review since the the requests will usually
> collect a larger number of commits (all from a single user typically,
> hence self consistent), and more secured since it favors pre-assessment.
>
> Opinions?
>
> Cheers
>
> Bruno
>
> [1] https://about.gitlab.com/product/
> [2] https://gricad-gitlab.univ-grenoble-alpes.fr/
> [3] https://gitlab.com/remche/trunk
>
> --
> _______________
> Bruno Chareyre
> Associate Professor
> ENSE³ - Grenoble INP
> Lab. 3SR
> BP 53
> 38041 Grenoble cedex 9
> Tél : +33 4 56 52 86 21
> Fax : +33 4 76 82 70 43
> ________________
>
> Email too brief?
> Here's why! http://emailcharter.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~yade-dev
> Post to     : yade-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~yade-dev
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>