Hi Ludovic, Ludovic Courtès <l...@gnu.org> writes:
> On that topic, I had an interesting discussion with Nicolas Petton of > Emacs about patch tracking. Nicolas explained that Gitlab (free > software) doesn’t have some of the technical defects that GitHub has; in > particular it can rebase instead of merging, thereby helping preserve a > linear history, and it can be dealt with “mostly” by email. Perhaps we > could try running an instance and see what it’s like. According to Gitlab Documentation [0] [1], the rebase feature you are talking about is only available in Gitlab Enterprise Edition, which is proprietary [2]. The libreboot website [3] explains "what's wrong with Gitlab", I think it is worth reading. The Kernel Recipes talk by Greg KH [4] about why the Linux kernel developers rely on plain text email instead of using "modern" development tools might be of some interest too. It'll happen in Paris on September 28 [5]. [0]: https://about.gitlab.com/features/#compare [1]: http://docs.gitlab.com/ee/workflow/rebase_before_merge.html [2]: https://about.gitlab.com/2014/02/11/gitlab-ee-license-change/ [3]: https://libreboot.org/gitlab/ [4]: https://kernel-recipes.org/en/2016/talks/patches-carved-into-stone-tablets/ [5]: https://kernel-recipes.org/en/2016/schedule/ Clément
