The TL;DR is that a crack team of infra-folks[0] have been putting together demos of CI services and things like gitlab / gitea / gerrit and so on.
Some of these come in combined (e.g. gitlab offers repo hosting, code review / pull reqs, CI services, and deploy services.) Some of these are piecemeal (e.g. gerrit has code review, zuul has CI) and gitea offers repo-hosting but CI is separate (e.g. drone.) On the infra-side, I think we are pretty happy with repo-hosting (gitolite) and repo-serving (gitweb). We are missing a CI piece and a pull-request piece. Most of the users using PRs use either a gitlab or github mirror. I think the value of CI is pretty obvious to me (and I see tons of use cases in Infra.) We could easily build CI into our current repository solution (e.g. gitolite.) However gitolite doesn't really support PRs in a uniform way and so CI is mostly for submitted code; similar to the existing ::gentoo repo CI offered by mgorny. If we build a code review solution (like gitea / gerrit) would people use it? Would you use it if you couldn't merge (because the code review solution can't gpg sign your commits or merges) so a tool like the existing pram tool would be needed to merge? -A [0] Mostly arzano, if I'm honest. I am just the point-y haired manager in this effort.
