On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 10:47 PM Nate Graham <n...@kde.org> wrote: > > One thing I'd really like to not lose is the review status feature > (approved/changes requested/etc). I've head that this is EE only. Is there > any word on getting that added to our package?
We'll look into discussing this with them. > > Other than that, I think I think what Gitlab offers over Phabricator is > either a significant win or else just something different that you can get > used to quickly. > > Nate Regards, Ben > > > ---- On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 02:26:24 -0600 Ben Cooksley <bcooks...@kde.org> > wrote ---- > > Hi all, > > > > Over the past few weeks we've had a discussion on whether we'd like to > > migrate from Phabricator to Gitlab, for handling both our code reviews > > as well as internal tasks (user facing bug reports are explicitly out > > of context at this time) > > > > Based on the comments the overall consensus seems to be at this stage > > to favour switching to Gitlab. > > > > This however is subject to a caveat around multiple task boards, which > > would be needed for larger projects to effectively coordinate amongst > > the various sub-projects. > > > > As part of the transition we will also arrange for the email interface > > to be enabled (for emailing in patches) and for the default for merges > > to be rebase when it's not a fast forward merge for all repositories. > > > > Does anyone have any final comments? > > > > In terms of the steps forward from here, Sysadmin will need a bit of > > time to prepare various parts of the infrastructure for the transition > > (such as the anongit network, which will need a full rebuild as part > > of switching). > > > > Once this is complete, we'll be in touch with more information on how > > the transition will take place. > > > > Thanks, > > Ben Cooksley > > KDE Sysadmin > > >
