[Live-demo] [live-demo] Migration to git

[Jorge Sanz]

2015-02-02 20:50 GMT+01:00 Alex Mandel <tech_dev at wildintellect.com>:
> On 02/02/2015 11:04 AM, Jorge Sanz wrote:
>> 2015-02-02 18:54 GMT+01:00 Angelos Tzotsos <gcpp.kalxas at gmail.com>:
>>> Hi Frank,
>>>
>>> Thanks for your kind words :)
>>>
>>> My initial e-mail was a proposal to start discussing moving to git, it was
>>> not an official roadmap or a migration announcement.
>>> The goal of this thread is to hear voices of support or voices against the
>>> Git migration, to see if the developers want this or not. I have discussed
>>> this issue with lots of developers in the last couple of years, I would like
>>> to hear their voice here :)
>>>
>>> Your understanding is accurate: I just created the Git mirror so we can all
>>> evaluate how the repository would look like (with history and everything),
>>> but it is read only for now. In case there is a serious amount of pull
>>> requests from git, I have a backup plan to commit from Git to SVN but I
>>> would like to avoid for now :)
>>>
>>> Regarding the issue tracker: we could keep the one we currently use, with
>>> the Trac-Git plugin. I hope that SAC will be able to support us with this.
>>> We could also start thinking for other solutions like Redmine or Gitlab (for
>>> source and tracker) if we feel they are superior.
>>> My personal preference would be to use free solutions for our
>>> infrastructure. An OSGeo GitLab installation would be great to have.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Angelos
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I'm in favour of using OSGeo infrastructure if it doesn't prevent
>> collaboration, but that also means bugging SAC with more work so we
>> have to be sure. I haven't used Gitlab so I don't have an opinion on
>> it. Let me be clear, I like GitHub, it's great and all, but as OSGeo
>> Live is a project of the foundation, I think we have (for the good and
>> the bad) to be an example of how projects can work within OSGeo.
>> Indeed, I think OSGeo Live is an example of great FOSS4G
>> collaboration!
>>
>
> Upgrade is long overdue, the question is do we have enough people to
> sustain the new deployment. We could also pay for a hosted version or
> support license.
>

Yes that was my main fear, you point that probably SAC doesn't have
the necessary task force to do this job, you have enough in your plate
right now, we know.

Maybe we should simply move to GitHub and accept our limitations.
GitHub has APIs for everything so if we'd move also our issue
management there, we could go back to a hosted infrastructure even I'm
afraid this is going to be a one way road :-(

>
>> Thinking aloud, and assuming we have an OSGeo git/gitlab installation,
>> do you guys know if it would be possible to have *easily* a double way
>> synchronization with GitHub or it would cause too much overhead? At
>> the end, I guess, nothing prevents to have a *main* GitHub repo (nice
>> for accepting contributions, nifty 1-click pull requests, etc) and a
>> mirror on an OSGeo git server, keeping the issue tracker in our Trac
>> or Gitlab. Am I right?
>>
>
> Gitlab is a clone of Github, including the Pull Request feature.
> Yes you can sync the git repos between the two (post commit hooks
> probably). Also Gitlab can accept Github logins once you create and
> account (at least the web hosted version does).

Apart from the fact of supporting the development of a mixed OSS
product, do you see any benefit on paying a GitLab organization
account[1] over using GitHub? I don't see it but I know little about
GitLab.


[1] https://about.gitlab.com/pricing/


-- 
Jorge Sanz
http://www.osgeo.org
http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Jorge_Sanz
GPG: 86F8 3EA0 BD19 0CA2 801D  4FB2 6B45 68E4 6FB2 D89D