[OSGeo-Discuss] What would you want from an OSGeo Git Service ?

Mateusz Loskot mateusz at loskot.net
Fri Apr 15 05:21:22 PDT 2016

On 15 April 2016 at 09:52, Sandro Santilli <strk at keybit.net> wrote:
> What would you want from an OSGeo Git Service ?

My 10 features are:

1. LDAP (log in with OSGeo User ID or OpenID)
2. Private repositories
3. Organizations (e.g./GDAL)
4. User space (fork /GDAL/gdal into /mloskot/gdal, also private fork)
5. Issue tracker (internal, as external would never be as well integrated)
-- Milestones, labels/categories, commit keywords (e.g. Fixes #123)
-- Comment issues via mail is not critical, but nice.
6. Wiki (internal, see above)
7. Code review (comments on diff lines is a minimum)
8. Pull requests
9. CI (integration with Travis CI and AppVeyor is a minimum)
10. Webhooks and any other mean to integrate with IRC, Gitter, Slack,
whatever teams like to use.

The comparison table [1] so far, I think, makes it clear GitLab is the only
self-hosted solution which is close to what we've got now: Subversion + Trac.
It also matches my 10 points.

Gogs wins due to low*** maintenance requirements,
but it will require custom development what, I think,
is a deal breaker - we have NO resources for this.

GitLab wins feature-wise, but its maintenance might turn
very demanding***. If bigger hassle than SVN+Trac this
also might be deal breaker - we have VERY limited resources.

***We need to allocate budget for admins!

Finally, GitHub, wins: feature-wise, marketing-wise, with 'zero' maintenance
- most, if not all, of our projects already prefer GitHub.
The only reason we haven't done it already is the cost.
Let's allocate budget for paid account.
Let's negotiate with GitHub a discount, we are not 501(c)(3), but we
are 501(c)(4).

However, the very first question is still open:
Do we want or need to switch at all?
Are all teams happy with the OSGeo SVN+Trac setup?


Best regards,
Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net

More information about the Discuss mailing list