I think this is a great idea! I very much support a move to Github; despite it's issues, it's just where development is happening today. Keeping a non-Github channel for submitting patches is also a great idea I think.
My free-software side worries about using something non-free like drone.io for CI but this is a huge task certainly and I'm not sure a free tool would meet everyone's needs (plus there's the huge added burden of maintenance). Eric On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Luka Perkov <l...@openwrt.org> wrote: > Dear OpenWrt mailing list readers, > > as the subject says I'd like to make proposal to move the OpenWrt > codebase to Git. This was already discussed before [1] and now when > there are no blockers [2] for this change I'd like that we as a > community move forward with this switch. > > Also, I'd like to propose that we move the project to GitHub and here > are the reasons why I see this as a good decision: > > * GitHub will allow people to contribute more easily > > The bigger amount of contributions has already happened and can be seen > on the packages feed which is already hosted on GitHub. With this I'm > also hoping to avoid comments regarding invalid patches on the mailing > list. > > For now I am proposing that the current development workflow is also > accepted - aka. patches that are sent to the mailing list are also > accepted. > > * GitHub and similar services will allow us to integrate more easily > with other projects > > Here specifically I mean integration with modern CI. Here is an example > of integration with drone.io [3][4]. At the moment this is only in the > POC stage but what I'd like to do down the line is to: > > - build OpenWrt images for all architectures for every pull request > > - build OpenWrt package binary for every package pull request for all > architectures and make it available for download > > - build and host OpenWrt qemu and/or Docker image for every pull request > > This will allow easy review of the work since flags will be shown in the > pull request if the build was sucessful or not. Also, this will allow > people to test changes without building the image and thus lowering the > time that needs to be spent on maintenance work. > > If this proposal gets accepted I'll be sending out an email to get > access to more build servers so this new build infrastructure can > properly support the project in a timely fashion. > > Please share your thoughts regarding this proposal. > > Regards, > Luka > > [1] > https://lists.openwrt.org/pipermail/openwrt-devel/2015-October/036390.html > [2] https://lists.openwrt.org/pipermail/openwrt-devel/2016-May/041329.html > [3] https://github.com/makkrnic/openwrt-qemu-x86 > [4] http://sartura-drone.makkrnic.com/makkrnic/openwrt-qemu-x86/5 > _______________________________________________ > openwrt-devel mailing list > openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org > https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel > -- Eric Schultz, Community Manager, prpl Foundation http://www.prplfoundation.org eschu...@prplfoundation.org cell: 920-539-0404 skype: ericschultzwi @EricPrpl
_______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
