Hi, > On 28. Jan 2019, at 00:45, Christian Grothoff <[email protected]> wrote: > > Signed PGP part > On 1/28/19 12:28 AM, Schanzenbach, Martin wrote: >> Hi dvn, >> >> I had a discussion wrt gitlab offlist with grothoff as well. >> tl;dr I am also a proponent of gitlab instead of BB+mantis. Even considering >> its problems. >> I also think that docker is a good and solid solution to keep services >> running and up to date. >> To be honest, to me guixsd seems to me like its ready for prime time almost >> as much as gnunet... >> >> @grothoff: let's give it a try? It is a reasonable short-term solution. > > As I thought I had made clear (to both you and dvn): if you set it up > and it works well, I won't mind ;-). But let me elaborate: > > (1) I think BB can do the CI work for us, but maybe Gitlab can work for > CI as well. I don't know enough about GitLab to be sure which one is > better for CI. > > (2) I don't like integrated tools. A bugtracker should track bugs. A CI > should do CI. I should be able to switch CI without switching bug > trackers, and vice versa. Systemd is disliked for good reasons by some > (admittedly, integration also has advantages). > > (3) I am very hesitant about migrating away from Mantis. We should > update to a current version, but migration would be costly (a lot of > work) or lossy (no data migration). I would dislike ending up with two > bug trackers. > > (4) What we do affects more than GNUnet. GNU Taler, pEp, libmicrohttpd, > GNU libextractor and other projects also depend on availability and > functionality of what we do. Please consider them as well.
This might actually cause headaches. > > (5) As for VMs/docker: I generally avoid them (unless for portability > testing), as I don't believe VMs add to security. Least priviledge does, > kvm is too close to the CPU for VMs to be considered 'least priviledge'. > If we can get Guix to deliver on its promise, we shouldn't need them to > "manage" conflicting dependencies/versioning. VMs also badly cost > performance, and will make it harder to migrate to less powerful systems > in an emergency (i.e. HW failure). So BB buildslaves in VMs were OK, but > primary services I prefer to have managed by the primary OS > configuration, and updated regularly (and not "forgotten", which happens > too often when you run 50 VMs). That said, until Guix is ready, > intermediary solutions are of course acceptable -- just describing my > "ideal" world. > > (6) Last but not least: it is conceivable for me that we could end up: > > (a) only using the CI of Gitlab, but not the bugtracker (and keep Gitolite) I think this is unreasonable and the biggest pain point IMO (apart from issue tracking). Well. I guess we _could_ mirror gitolite repos into gitlab. But that is dirty. We need to scrap gitolite if we switch to gitlab. > > (b) running the CI of Gitlab for some tasks, and BB for others (say if > Gitlab cannot be programmed freely enough for some of the CI tasks we > would like to see); that said, more tools == more work. > > As for "short term solutions", anything goes. But please don't waste a > year trying to migrate the Mantis database to Gitlab to then just find > out that we need BB after all ;-). > > > Finally, please let me know if you need DNS entries and/or accounts > and/or reverse proxies on either machine... > > Happy hacking! > > Christian > > >
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ GNUnet-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers
