On Wed, 2020-05-27 at 01:14 -0700, Alec Warner wrote: > On Tue, May 26, 2020, 23:08 Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > On Tue, 2020-05-26 at 20:24 -0700, Alec Warner wrote: > > > 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? > > > > > > > Does GitLab count? Gerrit is just PITA. I think we had some concerns > > about Gitea, so I'd like to test it before deciding. GitLab OTOH works > > just fine for a lot of projects, and seems the next best thing after > > GitHub > > Gitlab does count (we deployed and tested an onprem version.) I think there > are some major issues with it though. > - Licensing. Gitlab-CE is available, gitlab-EE is not OSS nor OSI approved > and many of the features we need are EE only and are not available in CE.
What are these features, and why do you believe we need them? > - Complex: Gitlab is a giant piece of software with maybe 8-12 components > (unicorn, postgres, redis, memcache, sidekiq, puma, workhouse, gitaly, > grafana, sshd,nginx, prometheus ..the list goes on) Is gitea any better? > - I think gitlab ships with more features than we will use (CD, docker > registry, issues / bugs, wiki, analytics, snippets, milestones, repo > hosting, repo browsing, ... Again the list goes on.) I don't play to > migrate away from bugs.gentoo.org nor wiki.gentoo.org, nor gitolite. I > think if we did; then gitlab would be a more compelling option because it > is a one-stop-shop solution for those use cases. I don't think there is any requirement to use all of them. Furthermore, I think some of them may actually be helpful -- say, some Gentoo- specific projects could use GitLab issue tracker over creating more Bugzilla components. > My understanding of gitea is that it works great for not-::gentoo, but > ::gentoo and gitea don't work well and it would require work upstream to > fix; other large repos seemed to work OK in gitea (based on our test > deployment and conversations with gitea upstream.) Works great for whom? How many deployments are we talking about? To be honest, I don't think I've stumbled upon a single instance. On the other hand, GitLab deployments are pretty common -- GNOME, Xfce, Debian come instantly to my mind. Then, there's Heptapod -- the GitLab fork for Mercurial. > Gerrit is widely used for large projects and I'm not worried for ::gentoo > and we have deployed gerrit and it seems to work fine. Gerrit doesn't have > CI (we would need to deploy something) and it uses gitweb for repository > browsing (which we use today.) > Not to mention it's ugly and I found it cumbersome to use. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
