[Qgis-psc] again about the bug tracker

[Denis Rouzaud]

Hi Vincent,

This was raised to PSC since all the folks involved follow this list while
the opposite is not true (PSC following qgis-dev). My intention was not to
hide anything, I'm sorry for this.

I have already read the page on the wiki a few times, and there is pretty
much no change since Madeira.
Some put a lot of energy to convince to investigate towards Gitlab and this
relied on the production of an estimate of the cost of the migration.

This was the grant, which was rejected, but
* why? because we want to stick to Redmine? because they prefer Github /
not wasting energy? because voters prefer flashy features?
* it could  have been ask to the PSC to sponsor this one (like many other
projects: documentation, Python API, etc).

My point is that the road decided in Madeira (investigating the costs of
moving to gitlab) is a fail at the moment. Of course, we can ask to be
patient but this issue has been raised for at least 5 years. You say it
needs time, I'm saying it needs energy. I'd love to some more pro-activity
on the topic than just discussing here.

My point that the current way is a fail might be wrong. At least, it's a
personal point of view, I agree.
In such case, we'll have to wait for another 6? months to get an estimate.
To say it'll take roughly a year to move the CI (I don't think we can live
with the code on Gitlab while the CI is on Travis/Github).

But in any case, things should move a bit faster.

Greetings,

Denis


Le mer. 10 oct. 2018 à 13:24, Vincent Picavet (ml) <vincent.ml at oslandia.com>
a écrit :

> Hi Denis, all,
>
> On 10/10/2018 15:32, Denis Rouzaud wrote:
> > The last issue about Redmine not sending mail makes me write again about
> > the topic.
> >
> > I'd like to propose to change direction from the decision which has been
> > taken in Madeira about moving to Gitlab.
>
> No decision has been taken in Madeira. I remember personally explaining
> that taking a migration decision should be backed by a full
> demonstration of capabilities, by clear explanations on advantages,
> drawbacks and implications.
> We should not do this kind of architecture change lightly.
>
> I have written all preliminary study results here :
> https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/wiki/QGIS-Platform-migration-plan


>
> > I'ts been roughly half a year and nothing moved except for a declined
> > grant proposal.
>
> Yes, for this kind of action, we need time, we need funding. I applied
> for a grant, and it has been rejected. I would be glad to resume the
> work on this subject, but it needs interest and funding, or it will not
> move forward.
>
> > I have heard something from Steven Feldman at the FOSS4G which rang a
> > bell. I don't recall the exact formulation nor my phrasing is as precise
> > but he advised to be pragmatic and to avoid losing too much energy on
> > ethical or not-strictly-related-to-the-topic issues...and to me, we're
> > looking at something (Gitlab) which represents weeks of development just
> > for the CI and which barely bring anything valuable over Github while we
> > stick to a non satisfying solution (Redmine).
>
> Please Denis, at least read the mail archives and the work already
> achieved before posting this kind of false statement :
> https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/wiki/QGIS-Platform-migration-plan
>
> It is true that CI has to be tested, but keeping a read-only GH copy
> should be enough to get Travis working, and give time for full migration
> to GitLab.
>
> On the Github side, nothing has been done to prove that a migration is
> even doable without problem.
>
> > I would not deny that ethical is important...but what/who are working
> for?
>
> This is your appreciation of things, and it may largely differ from
> person to person. Trying to push this opinion directly to PSC although
> we have already discussed these topic more broadly does not seem the
> right thing to do.
>
> Anyway, if we want to go forward with this topic, then the initial
> proposal of the grant application is still valid. I am confident that
> with budget we can finish up the migration study and reach a state where
> we proved that it is a good way to go.
>
> Any concrete help is welcome too on this subject.
>
> One other open question also is the cost of hosting and maintaining the
> solution, but this is more or less the same as for Redmine.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Vincent
>
> >
> > Best wishes,
> > Denis
> >
> > --
> >
> > Denis Rouzaud
> > denis at opengis.ch  <mailto:denis at opengis.ch>
> > +41 76 370 21 22 <+41%2076%20370%2021%2022>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Qgis-psc mailing list
> > Qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org
> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
> >
>
> --

Denis Rouzaud
denis at opengis.ch  <denis at opengis.ch>
+41 76 370 21 22
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/attachments/20181010/82dfe4cd/attachment.html>