Re: GitLab update: Moving to the next step

Hey Michael, On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 9:04 PM, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > I've been rewriting this email again and again to try not to be too > impolitic... and I don't think I've succeeded, but I want to try to express > the importance to me of some of the missing issue

Re: GitLab update: Moving to the next step

Hey Milan, I just took a look at your issue. You couldn't add a label because you didn't created any label in the project. I create some for you so you can play with them. https://gitlab-test.gnome.org/mcrha/test/issues/2 Best -- Carlos Soriano GNOME Foundation Treasurer, Board of Directors On

Re: GitLab update: Moving to the next step

Sorry, I meant this link https://gitlab-test.gnome.org/mcrha/test/labels. What you were missing is that labels are entities, and you can create, delete, rename, add a description, subscribe to them (for example for components of a project) etc. What I did to do what you see is left sidebar ->

Re: Suggestions for librsvg's COMPILING.md

On Sat, 2017-12-02 at 13:51 -0500, David Michael wrote: > > In librsvg's COMPILING.md, there are two inconsistencies around > cross-compiling. > > * The option --target=TRIPLE is passed to cargo, not --host. > * RUST_TARGET_PATH should be set for make, not configure. Ah, thanks for

Re: GitLab update: Moving to the next step

On Wed, 2017-12-06 at 19:31 +0100, Carlos Soriano wrote: > To explain it better, my discussions with them are for high impact > changes. My bandwidth is fully in there. Hi, that's understood and a reason why I made it "nice to have" and nothing more. I filled

Re: GitLab update: Moving to the next step

Emmanuele Bassi wrote: ... > This raises the question of who is going to review the currently > insufficient-bordering-on-useless code of conduct that we have for > GNOME online services and, more generally, for the community? ... As you know, I'm also on the Foundation Board

Re: GitLab update: Moving to the next step

On 7 December 2017 at 14:17, Allan Day wrote: > Emmanuele Bassi wrote: > ... >> This raises the question of who is going to review the currently >> insufficient-bordering-on-useless code of conduct that we have for >> GNOME online services and, more generally,

Re: GitLab update: Moving to the next step

On Thu, 2017-12-07 at 12:10 +, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: > On 7 December 2017 at 11:57, Germán Poo-Caamaño > wrote: > > > > Have you considered the backlash to GNOME that it may cause? > > https://twitter.com/Amorelandra/status/938444347506180096 > > > > I just learned about

Re: GitLab update: Moving to the next step

On 7 December 2017 at 11:57, Germán Poo-Caamaño wrote: > Have you considered the backlash to GNOME that it may cause? > https://twitter.com/Amorelandra/status/938444347506180096 > > I just learned about it. You should probably read the whole thread.

Re: GitLab update: Moving to the next step

On Thu, 2017-12-07 at 10:03 +0100, Milan Crha wrote: > I filled https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/40903 there. Hi again, and also https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/40904 I do not see how to add labels to the issue, and the test instance doesn't do anything with

Re: GitLab update: Moving to the next step

On Wed, 2017-12-06 at 18:49 +0100, Carlos Soriano wrote: > Hello community, > > I have good news, after few meetings and discussions with GitLab we > reached > an agreement on a way to bring the features we need and to fix our > most > important blockers >

Re: GitLab update: Moving to the next step

On 7 December 2017 at 12:18, Germán Poo-Caamaño wrote: >> And, yes: diversity is still an issue that we need to tackle [insert >> subtle reminder here about the code of conduct rework that the board >> is still working on and that I hope I'll see in my lifetime]. > > I did read

Re: GitLab update: Moving to the next step

Emmanuele Bassi wrote: ... > And, yes: diversity is still an issue that we need to tackle [insert > subtle reminder here about the code of conduct rework that the board > is still working on and that I hope I'll see in my lifetime]. ... Small clarification - it's the working

Re: GitLab update: Moving to the next step

On 7 December 2017 at 13:28, Allan Day wrote: > Emmanuele Bassi wrote: > ... >> And, yes: diversity is still an issue that we need to tackle [insert >> subtle reminder here about the code of conduct rework that the board >> is still working on and that I hope

Re: GitLab update: Moving to the next step

On Wed, 2017-12-06 at 18:49 +0100, Carlos Soriano wrote: > I have good news, after few meetings and discussions with GitLab we > reached an agreement on a way to bring the features we need and to > fix our most important blockers in a reasonable time and in a way > that are synced with us.

Re: GitLab update: Moving to the next step

On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 4:18 AM Germán Poo-Caamaño wrote: > On Thu, 2017-12-07 at 12:10 +, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: > > On 7 December 2017 at 11:57, Germán Poo-Caamaño > > wrote: > > > > > > > Have you considered the backlash to GNOME that it may cause? > > >

Re: GitLab update: Moving to the next step

On 12/07/2017 11:01 AM, Milan Crha wrote: b) How do I reply to a comment? This one should be a blocker to migrating any more projects. Lack of quoting is sufficiently annoying that it discourages me from participating in bug report for other maintainer's modules that have moved to GitLab.

Re: GitLab update: Moving to the next step

If you read my email fully and clicked the links, you would have seen the specific date the rebase before merge is coming to our instance. I'm surprised that copy a comment and clicking the button "quote" vs pressing a button should be considered a blocker for migrating more projects. If that's

Re: GitLab update: Moving to the next step

On Thu, Dec 7, 2017 at 6:19 PM, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > I'll add two more to Milan's list: > > (1) Canned replies. I would rather stay with Bugzilla forever than give up > canned replies. That is being tracked:

Re: GitLab update: Moving to the next step

On 7 December 2017 at 17:01, Milan Crha wrote: > On Wed, 2017-12-06 at 18:49 +0100, Carlos Soriano wrote: > a) See the second comment of >https://gitlab-test.gnome.org/mcrha/test/issues/2 >It shows like three lines of text (one line, then empty line, then >third

Re: GitLab update: Moving to the next step

On 7 December 2017 at 17:19, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > On 12/07/2017 11:01 AM, Milan Crha wrote: >> >> b) How do I reply to a comment? > > > This one should be a blocker to migrating any more projects. > (1) Canned replies. I would rather stay with Bugzilla forever than

Re: GitLab update: Moving to the next step

And I agree, I also want a reply button! On Thu., 7 Dec. 2017, 19:07 Carlos Soriano, wrote: > If you read my email fully and clicked the links, you would have seen the > specific date the rebase before merge is coming to our instance. > > I'm surprised that copy a comment

Re: GitLab update: Moving to the next step

I've been rewriting this email again and again to try not to be too impolitic... and I don't think I've succeeded, but I want to try to express the importance to me of some of the missing issue tracker features. On 12/07/2017 12:07 PM, Carlos Soriano wrote: Said that, add your comments about