[Qgis-developer] issue move to gh stalled

[Denis Rouzaud]

Hi all,

Being part of the unhappy, I would like to ask if you have considered
running our own gitlab instance or using a gitlab service?

To me integrated solution should be a hard requirement.

If we have to maintain something like Redmine, why not gitlab. It seems you
can categorize issues.

Denis

Le ven. 26 août 2016 22:24, Andreas Neumann <a.neumann at carto.net> a écrit :

> Hi,
>
> The issue tracker was discussed almost 1.5h at the board meeting - and
> it wasn't a clear and unanimous decision. Some board members (including
> me) also changed their minds during the discussion. Apparently not all
> core devs were happy with the quite limited filtering and structuring
> options that github offers. The issue tracker is certainly quite
> limited, compared to other issue tracker offerings. Offering only labels
> is quite limited. In addition, migrating all the existing tickets from
> Redmine to Github turned out to be non-trivial - and we don't want to
> loose the old issues.
>
> Finally, it is probably good that we are in control of the issues and
> that it runs on free software. The board knows that not all people are
> happy with this decision but one cannot make everyone happy ... we hope
> that the "unhappy" people can still live with the renewed (and faster)
> Redmine.
>
> The issues are migrated to the newest Redmine version and on a dedicated
> machine rented by QGIS.ORG to ensure good performance. This should make
> dealing with issues much more pleasant and more performant.
>
> Big thanks to Jürgen, Richard and Pirmin for dealing with the Redmine
> migration.
>
> Andreas
>
> Am 26.08.2016 um 22:08 schrieb Marco Bernasocchi:
> > .
> >
> >
> >> I was under the impression that we were leaning towards to migrating
> >> to GH issues tracker.
> >> What was the main reason behind choosing Redmine again? technical
> >> issues? lack of time to solve them? Will the migration to a new
> >> Redmine version be effortless?
> >>
> > Me too. I'm still convinced that this is a _very_ sub optimal solution
> for everybody.
> > Pity we really want to stick with something that forces us continuing
> having two different, non integrated tools where one could have done it in
> a great way.
> >
> > Cheers Marco
>
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-developer mailing list
> Qgis-developer at lists.osgeo.org
> List info: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/attachments/20160826/36bd22d0/attachment.html>