On 08/10/2015 04:38 PM, Bryan Richter wrote: > On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 11:29:36AM +0300, Nikita Karetnikov wrote: >> FYI, I renamed the project to snowdrift-ci because I'm no longer >> planning to use Bake: >> >> https://github.com/ndmitchell/bake/issues/15#issuecomment-129343416 > > I have a lot of concerns about this. I am concerned about starting yet > another in-house project that solves problems that have existing > solutions. (FLO solutions, even.) I also haven't seen any concrete > reasons why Bake can't be used. > > Over all of this, though, I am concerned that we are spreading > ourselves way too thin. Github + Travis does exactly... *exactly*... > what we need. Can we please make one tiny concession to our present > reality and switch to using it? > > Will anyone on this list be forced to stop contributing if we make > Github our primary source location? > >
As long as we *accept* code from other sources, nobody will be disenfranchised by our emphasis on GitHub, but as long as we don't *require* GitHub, I'm confused about how it would work. If we can have a process that is realistic for doing Travis CI stuff on GitHub even when code comes in from git.gnu.io, then why can't we just do that anyway while continuing to emphasize git.gnu.io? For that matter, did we ever actually consider GitLab CI? I also don't understand what's going on with Bake, nor do I personally yet fully appreciate the need to prioritize CI, but I don't have experience to judge. FWIW, GitLab.com itself is preferable to GitHub for various reasons (no proprietary JS!), so if hosting *there* was required for using GitLab CI, it would be an option to consider *if* GitLab CI would be a real answer. I also don't understand why CI is so complex. From Nikita's wording, it sounds like he actually thinks it'd be pretty easy to just get it working his way… but I also am super wary about overly-optimistic attempts to take on everything and end up with way more hassle than anticipated… I do *not* fundamentally oppose focusing on GitHub and Travis, it just seems crazy that it would be the only reasonable solution. Personally, I'd be okay with just pushing forward without CI, but again, I don't understand what we're missing. Overall, it's quite frustrating to keep running into these walls that aren't the core focus, but I do think at the *least* its valuable to at least *see* what the possibilities are for doing things ideally before we give up, but maybe we've done that at this point… not sure… -- Aaron Wolf Snowdrift.coop <https://snowdrift.coop> _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/dev
