Hi, On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 11:41 AM Stefan Blumentrath <[email protected]> wrote: > Two minor non-PSC comment on RFC 6, which generally looks very good to me: > > 1) One thing I probably would word a bit differently, is the comment on the > addon repository, that currently says: > " repository grass-addons > repository for addons (this will become less relevant as people tend to keep > their addons in own repositories)" > Here I would say that esp because people are keeping addons in private > repositories, it is even more important to simplify contribution to AddOns > (and I hope the move to git would help). Because I consider it as highly > valuable to have available addons gathered in one place (see amongst others: > https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/ticket/3583).
Yes: we should support both and be rather inviting towards our own addon repo (read: "mostly well maintained"). It is just a matter of fact that folks will keep code in their own repos but an addon manager from the grass-dev side you take care that relevant contributions are merged into our central addons repo as before. > 2) Even being among those who voted for gitlab, I have to admit (as hinted > earlier) that I would nevertheless come to the same conclusion that github > sould be the destination/target (simply for pragmatical reasons). Also, many > participants asked for OSGeo projects sticking together. And most of them are > on github. In my company we use successfully a self-deployed gitlab instance. Yet we want to have more contributors and many are on github... (so far). > That said, it would be nice if we could try to avoid making a later move away > from github too painful (no lock in). In other words, lets try (as far as > possible) to stay away from github-specific features[1] that will be hard to > move. Just to acknowledge that, > a) the decision for github as a target is mainly a pragmatical one (as it is > not Free and Open) and following the current majority vote yes. > b) even OSGeo projects that currently are on GitHub, like QGIS, have an eye > on Gitlab [2] based on a feature analysis [see 1] also yes. > c) with 43 participants voting for GitHub, 24 voting for gitlab (pluss 5 > voting for gitlab in OSGeo infrastructure) there is still (already?) a > significant number of people with different preferences > But again, lets move to git(hub) and try to stay as flexible as possible... For now, I have added a new subsection: https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/wiki/PSC/RFC/6_MigrationGitHub#Exitstrategy which essentially suggests to operate a real time mirror on gitlab.com. Best Markus PS: Did I mention that Martin Landa did an outstanding hard job with developing the svn2git converter scripts for code and issues? Weeks of work... thanks Martin!! > Cheers > Stefan > > 1: https://about.gitlab.com/devops-tools/github-vs-gitlab.html > 2: https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/wiki/QGIS-Platform-migration-plan _______________________________________________ grass-psc mailing list [email protected] https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-psc
