On 5/12/2010 10:10 AM, Thiago Macieira wrote: > Em Quarta-feira 12 Maio 2010, às 15:34:23, Ian Monroe escreveu: >> On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 8:13 AM, Esben Mose Hansen <[email protected]> > wrote: >>> On Tuesday 11 May 2010 21:29:47 Jeff Mitchell wrote: >>>> This all said, we discussed a few alternatives in #kde-git and I was >>> >>>> asked to put them on this list for discussion: >>> I know this is probably a stupid question, but since I can't see the >>> answer, perhaps other can't either. As far as I can see, we need >>> >>> 1. Actual git repositories >>> 2. User access controls >>> 3. Merge requests/reviewboard >>> 4. A bug tracking system >>> >>> How about the really simple solution of git + ssh + unix groups, and >>> patching reviewboard to support git, while keeping bugzilla as is? While >>> nowhere near as fancy, it seems a robust solution with minimal impact >>> and maintenance, where the only hard part would be the reviewboard >>> patching. There, a simple solution could be a social control, where >>> non-trivial patches are not pushed until reviewboarded, but are >>> otherwise pushed in the normal git-push fashion? If we wanted to be >>> fancy, we could have a sign-off SHA or URI in the commit message, which >>> could even be required. >> >> On top of git + ssh + unix group you need some administrative tools to >> handle user creation and management of hundreds of users. Thats what >> Gitolite does. > > We also need repositories connected to wikis. I don't like that the > playground > today is a mess of stuff no one knows about.
Redmine or Retrovista would help there; when someone puts something in playground they need (social policy) to create a project for it and an associated wiki page. --Jeff
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Kde-scm-interest mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-scm-interest
