On 12/08/2016 06:31 PM, Andrey Gursky wrote:
> Hi Yann,
> On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 10:41:29 +0100 Yann Leboulanger wrote:
>> On 12/07/2016 11:37 PM, Andrey Gursky wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> a couple of days ago I noticed, that mercurial repository has gone. But
>>> no replacement was setup. I haven't found any announcement here on the
>>> list about the migration. Couldn't you switch it just into read-only
>>> mode, which is already the only possible way to access the server for
>>> everybody except developers?
>> I don't want ppl to think it's still maintained. So I prefer completly
>> hide it.
> OK, in this case the repositories could be renamed. 

hg repos is completly useless now. Once again, if you find something
strange we have the old trac and old repos available somewhere and we
can check against it. If you want to do some checks against it, I'll
tell you the URL if you want, but no need to have it public.

>>> The old trac has gone either. What do you think about an archive
>>> read-only mode access?
>> Hard to make it read only. And why make it read only? (nearly) all is
>> supposed to be on gitlab
> Just in case there is something seems to be wrong and only look into
> the original can clarify the situation.

same answer than above.

>>> Let's look at https://dev.gajim.org/gajim/gajim/issues/8390
>>> It has been filed by anonymous. Can this be true? Did old trac allow
>>> anonymous accounts (without at least partly anonymezed email reference)?
>> I didn't create an account for all 2500 contributors that filles a
>> ticket. So yes we loose who created some tickets.
> This is very unfortunately. But why are there so many accounts? I
> believe it is due to the fact Gajim trac maintainers (were there many
> or only you?) forced every user, wanting just to report an issue with
> Gajim instead to take time to create an account, verify email, login.
> Now I'm kindly ask you to be consequent and please continue to maintain
> people contribution credits. It doesn't mean you would have to create
> all these accounts. The only thing has to be done, is to prepend every
> "anonymous" post with a corresponding original account name and email
> (spam protected). This is very important, to encourage people to post
> feedback to make Gajim better and get credited instead of showing,
> that all they are just nobody anonymous (so why should they bother with
> creating new accounts on gitlab and wasting time with filing bug reports?).
> Theoretically, if the password hashing mechanism of trac and gitlab
> were identical, I think accounts with old credentials could be created
> and used without noticing any difference. How passwords are stored on
> the old trac and new gitlab?

I don't want to send a mail saying "you have been active in Gajim trac
so we created you an account in gitlab" to a ppl that reported a bug 10
years agao and don't even remember what Gajim is. Si no I Created
accounts for ppl that reported at least 10 bugs. The others are gone
under anonymous.
And no the trac to mercurial is not so simple:
1/ It's not the same hash
2/ it was possible to register a trac account without a mail, it's not
in gitlab

>>> Looking further at the comment:
>>> https://dev.gajim.org/gajim/gajim/issues/8390#note_137507
>>> a changeset is mentioned:
>>> In [changeset:"849a745fc6c17d18626b480d4ed7d3844be8280e" 16114:849a745fc6c1]
>>> But I can't click on it to be forwarded to the actual commit. Hopefully,
>>> you can fix that?
>> it's is now.
> Thanks. (Though issues pages are returning 500 now.)

gitlab project is now fully functional.

>>> Let's look at https://dev.gajim.org/gajim/gajim/issues/8266
>>> Again, an anonymous has supplied a patch. But the patch looks like to
>>> be linked to Thilo Molitor's post.


 And in the commit
>>> https://dev.gajim.org/gajim/gajim/commit/766bb508e323f849d
>>> it seems the author is someone with nick gdr_gdr.

No. He provided a patch, but I committed it. I don't change commit authors.

 But despite of the
>>> commit comment "Fixes # 8266" the issue remained open. Moreover, due to
>>> the space between # and 8266 gitlab cannot replace it with a proper
>>> hyperlink. Maybe that is the reason for the stale status of the issue?
>> Maybe. Gitlab is currently very broken, so  I can't look at it. I'll do
>> later.
> Good, that this is not yet considered as final status.

Yes, the commit message was wrongly written, so not closed
automatically. Thanks for catching that. Ticket now closed.

>>> It would be great, if you could enable git:// access to the repositories.
>> it is enabled. Create an accoun, import ssh  key and use git://
> Almost all well known git servers, like kernel.org, repo.or.cz,
> gnome.org, github.com,.. allow anonymous git:// access. Why should it
> be so complicated with gitlab?

git:// is a ssh access. So without an account, hard to upload your
public ssh key.
https:// access is public. Just clone https://dev.gajim.org/gajim/gajim.git

Gajim-devel mailing list

Reply via email to