Am Freitag, den 08.05.2020, 13:07 +0200 schrieb David Kastrup: > Jonas Hahnfeld <hah...@hahnjo.de> writes: > > > 3) The idea is to have the "main" repository at GitLab, next to the > > issues and merge requests. This leads to the question what to do with > > Savannah because git is distributed anyway. I first thought about only > > pushing "important" branches and tags to GitLab (master, stable/*, > > release/*). Switching platforms would actually be one of the few > > opportunities to do so - in particular tags are hard to get rid of. > > However most of us are probably going to reuse their local repository, > > just updating the URL. While GitLab has options to prevent pushing > > certain refs, that's probably not a great idea. So I guess I'll just > > push an identical copy to GitLab unless somebody has a better > > proposal. > > > > Ultimately we can talk about cleaning up the Savannah repo and only > > keeping the "important" branches there. This could for example be > > coupled with automated mirroring, which GitLab supports out-of-the-box. > > I won't look into this for the initial switch though, so just make sure > > you're not pushing conflicting commits there... > > What kind of mirroring options are there?
Here's the documentation: https://gitlab.com/help/user/project/repository/repository_mirroring.md > I think it makes sense for > the non-developer access to keep referring/pointing to Savannah since I > consider it a resource with more long-term dependable availability. That is exactly the motivation. Syncing master (and a few others) from GitLab to Savannah should satisfy this need. Jonas
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
