Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

Am Dienstag, den 11.02.2020, 14:37 +0100 schrieb Jonas Hahnfeld: > Am Dienstag, den 11.02.2020, 14:27 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup: > > Jonas Hahnfeld < > > hah...@hahnjo.de > > > > > writes: > > > Am Dienstag, den 11.02.2020, 13:48 +0100 schrieb Federico Bruni: > > > > Il giorno mar 11 feb 2020 al

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

Jonas Hahnfeld writes: > Am Dienstag, den 11.02.2020, 14:27 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup: >> 7.6 ‘tsort’: Topological sort >> = >> >> [...] >> >> Now of course the non-linear manner of being able to update issues and >> the desire to have cross-reference means that we

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

Jonas Hahnfeld writes: > Am Dienstag, den 11.02.2020, 14:16 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup: >> I am not sure of when and how and whether at all it might make sense >> suggesting to GitLab that we would be a good showcase project, being >> ancient and with significant history of different trackers et

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

Am Dienstag, den 11.02.2020, 14:27 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup: > Jonas Hahnfeld < > hah...@hahnjo.de > > writes: > > > Am Dienstag, den 11.02.2020, 13:48 +0100 schrieb Federico Bruni: > > > Il giorno mar 11 feb 2020 alle 13:18, Jonas Hahnfeld < > > > hah...@hahnjo.de > > > > > > > > > ha scritt

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

Am Dienstag, den 11.02.2020, 14:16 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup: > Jonas Hahnfeld < > hah...@hahnjo.de > > writes: > > > Am Montag, den 10.02.2020, 09:20 +0100 schrieb Jonas Hahnfeld: > > > Am Sonntag, den 09.02.2020, 23:34 +0100 schrieb Federico Bruni: > > > > Il giorno dom 9 feb 2020 alle 22:50,

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

Jonas Hahnfeld writes: > Am Dienstag, den 11.02.2020, 13:48 +0100 schrieb Federico Bruni: >> Il giorno mar 11 feb 2020 alle 13:18, Jonas Hahnfeld < >> hah...@hahnjo.de >> > >> ha scritto: >> > > > Another shortcoming is that links to other issues are broken >> > > > (transformed in links to no

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

Am Dienstag, den 11.02.2020, 13:48 +0100 schrieb Federico Bruni: > Il giorno mar 11 feb 2020 alle 13:18, Jonas Hahnfeld < > hah...@hahnjo.de > > > ha scritto: > > > > Another shortcoming is that links to other issues are broken > > > > (transformed in links to non-existing anchors in current iss

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

Jonas Hahnfeld writes: > Am Montag, den 10.02.2020, 09:20 +0100 schrieb Jonas Hahnfeld: >> Am Sonntag, den 09.02.2020, 23:34 +0100 schrieb Federico Bruni: >> > Il giorno dom 9 feb 2020 alle 22:50, Jonas Hahnfeld < >> > hah...@hahnjo.de >> > >> > >> > ha scritto: >> > > Thanks for sharing! I put

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

Il giorno mar 11 feb 2020 alle 13:18, Jonas Hahnfeld ha scritto: > Another shortcoming is that links to other issues are broken > (transformed in links to non-existing anchors in current issue). I think that is because some issues have not (yet) been migrated. I hope these links start to wo

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

Am Montag, den 10.02.2020, 09:20 +0100 schrieb Jonas Hahnfeld: > Am Sonntag, den 09.02.2020, 23:34 +0100 schrieb Federico Bruni: > > Il giorno dom 9 feb 2020 alle 22:50, Jonas Hahnfeld < > > hah...@hahnjo.de > > > > > > ha scritto: > > > Thanks for sharing! I put together a simplistic script to c

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

Am Montag, den 10.02.2020, 07:58 +0100 schrieb Han-Wen Nienhuys: > Very nice. Why is the project/user called lilypond-issues? Because I don't want to to do this with my personal account. First I created a personal repo hahnjo/lilypond and granted lilypond-issues access to it. That doesn't work unf

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

Am Sonntag, den 09.02.2020, 23:34 +0100 schrieb Federico Bruni: > Il giorno dom 9 feb 2020 alle 22:50, Jonas Hahnfeld < > hah...@hahnjo.de > > > ha scritto: > > Thanks for sharing! I put together a simplistic script to create a > > proof-of-concept: > > https://gitlab.com/lilypond-issues/lilypond

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

Very nice. Why is the project/user called lilypond-issues? Do we know who owns the 'lilypond' user? On Sun, Feb 9, 2020 at 10:50 PM Jonas Hahnfeld wrote: > Am Freitag, den 07.02.2020, 16:28 +0100 schrieb Federico Bruni: > > Il giorno ven 7 feb 2020 alle 10:33, Federico Bruni > > < > > f...@inven

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

Il giorno dom 9 feb 2020 alle 22:50, Jonas Hahnfeld ha scritto: Thanks for sharing! I put together a simplistic script to create a proof-of-concept: https://gitlab.com/lilypond-issues/lilypond/issues It's only 1137 issues (now my server is blacklisted for spamming...), but it has some important

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

Am Sonntag, den 09.02.2020, 23:03 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup: > Jonas Hahnfeld < > hah...@hahnjo.de > > writes: > > > Am Freitag, den 07.02.2020, 16:28 +0100 schrieb Federico Bruni: > > > Il giorno ven 7 feb 2020 alle 10:33, Federico Bruni > > > < > > > f...@inventati.org > > > > > > > ha scrit

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

>> Please all take a look and let me know what you think! > > For a first pitch certainly impressive. It's nice that the SHA1 ids > have become live. +1 Very nice! Werner

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

Am Sonntag, den 09.02.2020, 22:50 +0100 schrieb Jonas Hahnfeld: > Am Freitag, den 07.02.2020, 16:28 +0100 schrieb Federico Bruni: > > Il giorno ven 7 feb 2020 alle 10:33, Federico Bruni > > < > > f...@inventati.org > > > > > ha scritto: > > > I guess that the quality of the issue migration might

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

Jonas Hahnfeld writes: > Am Freitag, den 07.02.2020, 16:28 +0100 schrieb Federico Bruni: >> Il giorno ven 7 feb 2020 alle 10:33, Federico Bruni >> < >> f...@inventati.org >> > ha scritto: >> > I guess that the quality of the issue migration might influence the >> > decision. >> >> I forgot I a

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

Am Freitag, den 07.02.2020, 16:28 +0100 schrieb Federico Bruni: > Il giorno ven 7 feb 2020 alle 10:33, Federico Bruni > < > f...@inventati.org > > ha scritto: > > I guess that the quality of the issue migration might influence the > > decision. > > I forgot I already investigated the SF -> GitLa

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

Il giorno ven 7 feb 2020 alle 10:33, Federico Bruni ha scritto: I guess that the quality of the issue migration might influence the decision. I forgot I already investigated the SF -> GitLab migration almost 2 years ago: http://lilypond.1069038.n5.nabble.com/Allura-SourceForge-to-Gitlab-migr

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

Urs Liska writes: > To recap at this point: the worry about gitlab.com is similar to that > wrt guthub: their TOS won't give us a substantial amount of trust in > continuity of service. The seminal difference being that a workable free version of their software is available for the purpose of se

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

Karlin High writes: > On 2/7/2020 1:59 AM, Jonas Hahnfeld wrote: >> re "single-patch commits": Firstly we currently push multiple commits >> from one review (at least Dan and I do), so I don't fully understand >> the point. > > I probably didn't relate the discussion properly. It had to do with >

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

Am Freitag, den 07.02.2020, 10:36 +0100 schrieb Urs Liska: > I think this is an extremely good point. Being able to squash upon merge, > with or without merge commit, in combination with being able to automate that > as a staging branch with final test, seems a very good idea to me. Possibly in

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

Il giorno ven 7 feb 2020 alle 10:36, Urs Liska ha scritto: To recap at this point: the worry about gitlab.com is similar to that wrt guthub: their TOS won't give us a substantial amount of trust in continuity of service. It's always been this situation unfortunately (see Google Code shutdown

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

Il giorno ven 7 feb 2020 alle 08:59, Jonas Hahnfeld ha scritto: I first want to gather consensus that GitLab is really a platform that (at least) a large part of the community could agree on, for the scoped purpose of replacing the three tools we currently use. I'm totally in favour of GitLa

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

Am 7. Februar 2020 09:48:30 MEZ schrieb Kevin Barry : >> (CC to Kevin Barry, who mentioned GitLab experience in a separate >> thread. My info here is more based on research than experience, so >> please call out any misunderstandings I have.) > >Thank you for the CC. I have read through the mess

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

> (CC to Kevin Barry, who mentioned GitLab experience in a separate > thread. My info here is more based on research than experience, so > please call out any misunderstandings I have.) Thank you for the CC. I have read through the messages, and the previous discussion from 2018. My two cents are

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

On 2/7/2020 2:36 AM, Jonas Hahnfeld wrote: You removed the important part with my answer: Additionally I'm not (yet) proposing to use MRs to actually merge the change, that still happens via staging -> master. I only propose that we use the UI to review the patches, instead of Rietveld. Apolog

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

Am Freitag, den 07.02.2020, 02:30 -0600 schrieb Karlin High: > On 2/7/2020 1:59 AM, Jonas Hahnfeld wrote: > > re "single-patch commits": Firstly we currently push multiple commits > > from one review (at least Dan and I do), so I don't fully understand > > the point. > > I probably didn't relate t

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

On 2/7/2020 1:59 AM, Jonas Hahnfeld wrote: re "single-patch commits": Firstly we currently push multiple commits from one review (at least Dan and I do), so I don't fully understand the point. I probably didn't relate the discussion properly. It had to do with commits vs branch merges. This po

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

Am Donnerstag, den 06.02.2020, 21:34 -0600 schrieb Karlin High: > On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 9:09 AM Jonas Hahnfeld < > hah...@hahnjo.de > > wrote: > > I propose > > to start using GitLab hosted on gitlab.com [4] for all of this: > > Repository, Issues, and Merge Requests (MR) for reviews. > > A threa

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

On Wed, Feb 5, 2020 at 9:09 AM Jonas Hahnfeld wrote: > I propose > to start using GitLab hosted on gitlab.com [4] for all of this: > Repository, Issues, and Merge Requests (MR) for reviews. A thread in 2018 explored GitLab's feasibility for LilyPond.

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

Am Mittwoch, den 05.02.2020, 21:02 + schrieb pkx1...@posteo.net: > On 05/02/2020 16:13, Dan Eble wrote: > > On Feb 5, 2020, at 10:09, Jonas Hahnfeld < > > hah...@hahnjo.de > > > wrote: > > > required to synchronize the review and the associated issue. I propose > > > to start using GitLab hoste

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

On 05/02/2020 16:13, Dan Eble wrote: On Feb 5, 2020, at 10:09, Jonas Hahnfeld wrote: required to synchronize the review and the associated issue. I propose to start using GitLab hosted on gitlab.com [4] for all of this: Repository, Issues, and Merge Requests (MR) for reviews. It was evaluated '

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

On Feb 5, 2020, at 10:09, Jonas Hahnfeld wrote: > > required to synchronize the review and the associated issue. I propose > to start using GitLab hosted on gitlab.com [4] for all of this: > Repository, Issues, and Merge Requests (MR) for reviews. It was > evaluated 'C' in 2015 [5] and should be

Re: [RFC] switch to GitLab / gitlab.com

Jonas Hahnfeld writes: [Not repeating well-thought considerations] > Closing thoughts > > > GitLab has a feature called 'Repository mirroring' [8], working in both > directions. During the switching period, we could maintain Savannah as > our main repository and let GitLab pull