[GRASS-PSC] git migration

[Markus Neteler]

Hi,

On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 11:41 AM Stefan Blumentrath
<Stefan.Blumentrath at nina.no> wrote:
> Two minor non-PSC comment on RFC 6, which generally looks very good to me:
>
> 1) One thing I probably would word a bit differently, is the comment on the addon repository, that currently says:
> " repository grass-addons
> repository for addons (this will become less relevant as people tend to keep their addons in own repositories)"
> Here I would say that esp because people are keeping addons in private repositories, it is even more important to simplify contribution to AddOns (and I hope the move to git would help). Because I consider it as highly valuable to have available addons gathered in one place (see amongst others: https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/ticket/3583).

Yes: we should support both and be rather inviting towards our own
addon repo (read: "mostly well maintained").
It is just a matter of fact that folks will keep code in their own
repos but an addon manager from the grass-dev side you take care that
relevant contributions are merged into our central addons repo as
before.

> 2) Even being among those who voted for gitlab, I have to admit (as hinted earlier) that I would nevertheless come to the same conclusion that github sould be the destination/target (simply for pragmatical reasons). Also, many participants asked for OSGeo projects sticking together. And most of them are on github.

In my company we use successfully a self-deployed gitlab instance. Yet
we want to have more contributors and many are on github... (so far).

> That said, it would be nice if we could try to avoid making a later move away from github too painful (no lock in). In other words, lets try (as far as possible) to stay away from github-specific features[1] that will be hard to move. Just to acknowledge that,
>  a) the decision for github as a target is mainly a pragmatical one (as it is not Free and Open) and following the current majority vote

yes.

>  b) even OSGeo projects that currently are on GitHub, like QGIS, have an eye on Gitlab [2] based on a feature analysis [see 1]

also yes.

>  c) with 43 participants voting for GitHub, 24 voting for gitlab (pluss 5 voting for gitlab in OSGeo infrastructure) there is still (already?) a significant number of people with different preferences
> But again, lets move to git(hub) and try to stay as flexible as possible...

For now, I have added a new subsection:
   https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/wiki/PSC/RFC/6_MigrationGitHub#Exitstrategy
which essentially suggests to operate a real time mirror on gitlab.com.

Best
Markus

PS: Did I mention that Martin Landa did an outstanding hard job with
developing the svn2git converter scripts for code and issues? Weeks of
work... thanks Martin!!

> Cheers
> Stefan
>
> 1: https://about.gitlab.com/devops-tools/github-vs-gitlab.html
> 2: https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/wiki/QGIS-Platform-migration-plan