[QGIS-Developer] Last call for switching to github issue tracker

[Denis Rouzaud]

Le mer. 17 janv. 2018 à 18:06, Tim Sutton <tim at kartoza.com> a écrit :

> Hi
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 8:34 AM, Denis Rouzaud <denis.rouzaud at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'd like to move on a bit the discussion.
>>
>> I'll try to summarize (and to be fair and honest):
>>
>> * The desire to switch to Github is strong
>> 1 against: Sandro
>> 5 neutral (or did not pronounce): Jürgen, Andreas, Richard, Paolo, Nyall
>> 9 for: Borys, Matthias, Tom, Jorge, Régis, Bernard (says Redmine sucks),
>> Loic, Tisharm and myself
>>
>
> Is that Tom or Tim? For the record in an ideal world I would like to be on
> GitHub too….
>

sorry I forgot to count you in neutral at the time of writing, but I'm
happy to count you in the pros ;)

>
>
>> * But among those who spoke. I was hoping for a broader response.
>>
>> * I think we shouldn't mix switching to github (for technical reason)
>> with switching to gitlab or so (for ethical reason). My original call was
>> mainly for technical reasons and I believe, the end-users should decide on
>> this.
>>
>> * As stated, ethical reason should rely on the PSC. Feel free to call for
>> it.
>>
>> * I believe that we should first decide on what to do and next find the
>> technical (and financial) solutions. And not the other way around.
>>
>> * Jorge volunteered to work on the topic.
>>
>> Additional **personal** notes:
>>
>> * I would be against moving all issues to github. That doesn't mean
>> losing our history: let's just keep redmine online but locked. This has to
>> be discussed and decided after deciding to move to github.
>>
>> * Another upcoming issue we HAVE to take care of: soon the PR number in
>> GH will catch up with the issue number in Redmine....so bugfix commits will
>> link to an unrelated PR... Keeping things untouched by fear of losing
>> history is a suicide!
>>
>>
>> Can we make a decision, and in this order:
>> 1. decide to move (but to be applied if following questions are made
>> possible)
>> 2. what/when to move (empty list or everything or open issues, before the
>> release, etc.)
>> 3. how to move (volunteer, grant proposal, etc)
>>
>> And if we realize the decision is not feasible: we start again the
>> procedure by stating we cannot do it.
>> It would be useless to spend hours on trying to migrate the issues if we
>> decide to start with an empty list -- just to illustrate.
>>
>> What is next?
>> A loomio vote for this?
>>
>
> So I would suggest raising a vote on the motion:
>
> “We should adopt GitHub issues for reporting issues in 3.0 and restrict
> Redmine for the management of issues in QGIS 2.x”.
>

Great. Will you take care of it?

>
> After there are no more active 2.x releases, we make the Redmine tracker
> read only and keep it around as an archive. We could put into the GitHub
> issue template: “Only use this tracker for 3.x related issues” and similar
> message on Redmine indicating that it should only be used for 2.x issues.
> It will unfortunately leave us in the position where you need to check to
> issue trackers for your issue which is going to suck a bit.
>
> Regards
>
> Tim
> —
>
>
> [image: KartozaNewLogoThumbnail.jpg]
>
>
>
>
> *Tim Sutton*
>
> *Co-founder:* Kartoza
> *Project chair:* QGIS.org
>
> Visit http://kartoza.com to find out about open source:
>
> Desktop GIS programming services
> Geospatial web development
> GIS Training
> Consulting Services
>
> *Skype*: timlinux
> *IRC:* timlinux on #qgis at freenode.net
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/attachments/20180118/009f629f/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: KartozaNewLogoThumbnail.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 6122 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/attachments/20180118/009f629f/attachment-0001.jpg>