Hi, On Fri, Jan 1, 2016 at 9:21 PM, Brett Cannon <br...@python.org> wrote: > I don't think this will be a shock to anyone who has followed the discussion > on this list. The decision is essentially based on: > > No major distinguishing features between GitHub or GitLab > Familiarity amongst core devs -- and external contributors -- with GitHub > Guido prefers GitHub > > Neither platform had some mind-blowing feature(s) that really made them > stand out from each other such that it would greatly simplify our lives if > we chose one platform over another. I obviously was really hoping there was > going to be something I missed, but nothing ever came up (and no, being open > source is not enough of a feature; as I said when I started this process, > being open source would help break ties or minor lead of one tool but not be > a deciding factor). > > But what Github does have over GitLab is familiarity. While there were > people who publicly said they would prefer not to go with GitHub but would > begrudgingly use it if we chose to go that route, I had multiple core devs > email me privately saying they hoped I would choose GitHub. I think most of > that stemmed from having used GitHub for other open source projects and/or > work, making even dormant core devs say they would be able to become active > again if we switched to GitHub thanks to eliminating the barrier of having > to keep up with our custom workflow for code reviews and using hg for > commits. And while I said it wasn't a goal to make things easier for > external contributors, I also can't ignore the fact that the vast majority > of people out there who might want to help out are already familiar with > GitHub. > > And at least for me, the fact Guido prefers GitHub means something. While > Guido himself would say I shouldn't really worry about his preferences since > he is only an occasional contributor at this point, I believe that it's > important that our BDFL actually like contributing to his own programming > language rather than potentially alienating him because he finds the process > burdensome. > > So that's why I have chosen GitHub over GitLab. Please realize that this is > choosing GitHub to provide repository hosting and code review; we are not > moving our issue tracker, nor are we moving our wiki. And the long-term plan > is to set up a bot that will handle our commit workflow which will help > isolate us from any repository hosting platform we are on and making moving > easier in the future (and short-term people will use the command-line and > that's totally platform-agnostic). > > Thanks to everyone who contributed to this decision, especially Donald, > Barry, and Nick for making the proposals we had to work from. > > We can start the discussion of how we want to handle the transition next > week, but I'm going to try and step away from this whole workflow topic > until Monday so I can spend the last couple of days of my vacation not > thinking about this stuff. :) >
This will likely require a new PEP, that should cover: 1) the new workflow (including how to handle reviews -- see below); 2) the steps required for the migration and a timeline; 3) a list of things that will break and/or that will need to be added/replaced before/during/after the migration; 4) the fate of hg.python.org; Some of these things might already be covered by existing PEPs, but I don't see them in PEP 507[0] and 481[1] (and I'm getting a bit lost among all the competing PEPs and multiple threads across at least a couple different MLs :). Above you said that GitHub will be used for reviews but we will keep using our bug tracker. This leads to the following questions: * Do GitHub reviews only work for pull requests? * Are we still going to support uploading diffs/patches to the tracker (short term and long term)? * If so, how/where are we going to review those diffs/patches? * Will patches be automatically converted to pull requests, or pull requests converted to patches and attached to b.p.o issues? * Are there plans to migrate existing Rietveld reviews to GitHub and shut Rietveld down for good? * If not, will Rietveld stay around and be read-only? Or will it still be used for patches uploaded to b.p.o? * What else is needed to integrate GitHub and b.p.o? About points 3 of the initial list, these are some examples of things that will need to be added/updated/replaced: * the hgroundup hook[2] that post messages to b.p.o when a commit includes an issue number needs to be replaced; * the hgirker hook[3] used for deadparrot on #python-dev needs to be replaced (probably there is already an irker-git hook that can be used/adapted); * the hgbuildbot[4] hook that triggers the buildbots on commit needs to be replaced; * other hg hooks[5] might need to be rewritten/replaced; * the script[6] that generates bug tracker links to hg.p.o needs to be updated (for both cs ids and paths); * the hg code that converts issue links in commit messages to b.p.o links needs to be replaced; * other places where issue numbers appears on GitHub should generate links to b.p.o; * the hg-cpydev hg extension [7] should be ported to git (optional); * the buildbots need to be updated if they are going to pull the source from github and use git; * the bug tracker will need to be updated to interact with github; * the devguide needs to be updated (both to cover the new workflow and update links/commands); FWIW next weekend (9-10 January) we are organizing a sprint in Helsinki, and I'm planning to work on the bug tracker, so I might be able to start addressing some of these points. Best Regards, Ezio Melotti P.S. enjoy your last few days of vacation while you can ;) [0]: https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0507/ [1]: https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0481/ [2]: https://hg.python.org/hooks/file/tip/hgroundup.py [3]: https://hg.python.org/hooks/file/tip/hgirker.py [4]: https://hg.python.org/hooks/file/tip/hgbuildbot.py [5]: https://hg.python.org/hooks/file/tip [6]: https://hg.python.org/tracker/python-dev/file/tip/extensions/local_replace.py [7]: https://bitbucket.org/introom/hg-cpydev _______________________________________________ core-workflow mailing list core-workflow@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/core-workflow This list is governed by the PSF Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct
