Re: GitLab postmortem
On the whole, I'm really pleased with GitLab. Especially really pleased with the ability to start discussions during reviews and mark comments as resolved. It's a bit of a shame we can't batch comments like on GitHub, but marking discussions as resolved is amazing and makes up for it. The biggest problem by far has been Bugzilla migration. We still have tons of modules (e.g. gnome-shell, gnome-weather, geary, gsettings-desktop-schemas... just a few off the top of my head) which have still not completed Bugzilla migration. The very slow pace of migration is quite frustrating. Also, Bugzilla is quite broken right now, so you have to use Andre's direct links to get to the patch queue, bug list, etc. This would be a lot less frustrating once issues migrate, but in the meantime makes working with these modules almost impractical. Finally, it's just annoying to split discussion between Bugzilla and GitLab based on the time an issue was filed, or between patches and merge requests, for example. I know it's a huge pain to do these migrations, but at least it's just a one-time cost and then we can be fully moved to GitLab. On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 5:06 PM, Christian Hergert wrote: We have issue templates (although I haven't figured out how to set them up for my projects), but not issue reply templates. The issue templates are borderline useless though, because the ability to set a template as the default issue template is an EE feature. This means nobody ever looks at them. I tried these briefly but wound up removing them. I really want to be able to show users a short message or issue template before they report bugs I really need reply templates to keep up with the number of bugs I need to close after creation for a number of reasons. * Dups * Fixed in master, branch * Out of scope * User support * Feature requests (I take note of requests, but we do not hold bugs open, they only influence our roadmap). Failure to have reply templates results in grumpier replies from yours truly. I really miss these canned replies too. It's just a small annoyance, but it would be nice to have. Lacking some EE features is disappointing, but still, GitLab CE is much better than I was expecting. I'm very happy with how this has turned out (asides from the bug migrations). Apologies for my initial skepticism years ago. :) Michael ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GitLab postmortem
On 12/11/18 5:22 AM, Carlos Soriano wrote: > > Please keep the mail chain one way from you towards the world, so we > don't get trapped on specifics, we can address stuff raised here > individually out of list. Personally, I'll ping you on IRC or so if I > can do something to help. We have issue templates (although I haven't figured out how to set them up for my projects), but not issue reply templates. I really need reply templates to keep up with the number of bugs I need to close after creation for a number of reasons. * Dups * Fixed in master, branch * Out of scope * User support * Feature requests (I take note of requests, but we do not hold bugs open, they only influence our roadmap). Failure to have reply templates results in grumpier replies from yours truly. -- Christian ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GitLab postmortem
Le mardi 11 décembre 2018 à 14:22 +0100, Carlos Soriano a écrit : > Hey, > It has been a few months since we moved to GitLab. Apart of spurious issues, > specific annoyances and frustrations, seems it has been generally good. I > would like to gather some general feeling about it. Things that really made a > constant impact to you and your work, both bad or good. Feel free to provide > feedback about the transition or the administration of GitLab instance too. > Free form. > > Please keep the mail chain one way from you towards the world, so we don't > get trapped on specifics, we can address stuff raised here individually out > of list. Personally, I'll ping you on IRC or so if I can do something to help. > > Of course, feel free to msg me directly on IRC/email too. 1. No Cross-Project CI supportIt's a bit off topic, as GStreamer is on FDO now. But the one thing that had hit was how complex the CI deployment across multiple projects (repository is). We really miss the pipeline aggregation on trigger that exist in the EE version. The side effect, builds are scattered across all repo, instead of being centrealized on the specific build system repo (in our case cerbero and gst-build). So looking over all builds is near impossible. The caches are always cold, because the build is too scattered. So all in all, what I really miss is that ability to trigger another project (repository) pipeline and gain an aggregated pipeline. With Jenkins, it fully centralized, hence much simplier, but still, now we can per commit CI, which is great. 2. No multi-commit codec review workflow Unlike github, there is no fluid way to navigate through each commits one by one during the review. The stack of commit is also upside down for a review. I generally endup opening commit in browser tabs, but that's not idea. Note that this is probably not a regression from bugzilla, but I was surprise to find out how inferior this is in gitlab in contrast to gihub. > Thanks all! > > ___desktop-devel-list mailing > listdesktop-devel-l...@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GitLab postmortem
Hey Carlos, thanks for bringing this topic to the table. I certainly have feedback to share! Wall of text, tl;dr: GitLab is great, but could be greater; increased number of contributions, but not contributors; better tools to manage issues, but lacks project and product management features; needs better cli tools. Overall, my experience since the introduction of GitLab has been great so far. It is, without a doubt, a huge improvement over Bugzilla + cgit. The first impact it had on the projects I maintain is the massively increased number of contributions. Calendar and To Do are smaller apps, but saw an increase of around 2x the number of external contributions. Settings is a bigger app, and since I took over maintainership and instituted a shared maintainership model, the number of merge requests skyrocketed - to the point of becoming hard to keep track of it. I still haven't decided if this is a positive or negative aspect. I'm afraid this might have a negative impact on some high-bandwidth-but-on-maintainer-shortage modules, like GNOME Shell. I mean, even on Settings, when I see that there are *goddamn 30* open merge requests, I silently freak out. The influx of *contributions*, not *contributors*, increased, and there is a price we pay for that: more time spent on review means less time spent on coding. On top of that, I have to say, even though GitLab's issue management is fantastic for individual tickets, there is still a long road for mass managing tickets. It's still a PITA to mass label or change milestones of tickets. Feature-wise, GitLab is good enough, but as I expressed on IRC multiple times, I'm somewhat pissed off with their decision of not CE-ing some features (related tickets, multiple reviewers, etc). Specifically about reviewers, as it is right now, the feature is useless. On single-maintainer projects, nobody assigns that field because there's only one someone that will check that. On multiple-maintainer projects, the field is misleading since the merge request will probably be reviewed by more than a single someone. As Christian said in the past, GitLab lacks project and product management tools. Milestones are okay, but they could be so much more useful than they are right now. But my expectations are low due to the multiple disappointments regarding EE-ing important and useful features and leaving CE helpless. Em ter, 11 de dez de 2018 às 11:23, Carlos Soriano escreveu: > Hey, > > It has been a few months since we moved to GitLab. Apart of spurious > issues, specific annoyances and frustrations, seems it has been generally > good. I would like to gather some general feeling about it. Things that > really made a constant impact to you and your work, both bad or good. Feel > free to provide feedback about the transition or the administration of > GitLab instance too. Free form. > > Please keep the mail chain one way from you towards the world, so we don't > get trapped on specifics, we can address stuff raised here individually out > of list. Personally, I'll ping you on IRC or so if I can do something to > help. > > Of course, feel free to msg me directly on IRC/email too. > > Thanks all! > ___ > desktop-devel-list mailing list > desktop-devel-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GitLab postmortem
On Tue, 2018-12-11 at 14:29 +0100, Alberto Fanjul Alonso via desktop- devel-list wrote: > It was a huge improvement. Now is really easy for many different > skilled > people to contribute. > > > I just miss a good global code search, (which I use all the time in > similar services to check real usages of gtk or vala for example) I second this one. So far, I search on https://github.com/GNOME/ but it would be nice to do it on Gitlab. -- Germán Poo-Caamaño http://calcifer.org/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Re: GitLab postmortem
It was a huge improvement. Now is really easy for many different skilled people to contribute. I just miss a good global code search, (which I use all the time in similar services to check real usages of gtk or vala for example) I miss to be able to include chunks of code with an URL or markdown tag in issue comments Appart from that, all feels great El mar., 11 dic. 2018 14:23, Carlos Soriano escribió: > Hey, > > It has been a few months since we moved to GitLab. Apart of spurious > issues, specific annoyances and frustrations, seems it has been generally > good. I would like to gather some general feeling about it. Things that > really made a constant impact to you and your work, both bad or good. Feel > free to provide feedback about the transition or the administration of > GitLab instance too. Free form. > > Please keep the mail chain one way from you towards the world, so we don't > get trapped on specifics, we can address stuff raised here individually out > of list. Personally, I'll ping you on IRC or so if I can do something to > help. > > Of course, feel free to msg me directly on IRC/email too. > > Thanks all! > ___ > desktop-devel-list mailing list > desktop-devel-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
GitLab postmortem
Hey, It has been a few months since we moved to GitLab. Apart of spurious issues, specific annoyances and frustrations, seems it has been generally good. I would like to gather some general feeling about it. Things that really made a constant impact to you and your work, both bad or good. Feel free to provide feedback about the transition or the administration of GitLab instance too. Free form. Please keep the mail chain one way from you towards the world, so we don't get trapped on specifics, we can address stuff raised here individually out of list. Personally, I'll ping you on IRC or so if I can do something to help. Of course, feel free to msg me directly on IRC/email too. Thanks all! ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
Help wanted with the shell's top bar
Hi all, Back in 3.26 we introduced semi-transparency to the shell's top bar. On the design side we were never all that happy with where the UI landed and have wanted to improve it since then. However, we've been unable to make any progress. We don't want to have another release with the current top bar appearance, so we've decided that, if we can't improve the appearance before the 3.32 UI freeze, we'd prefer to revert back to the always opaque black bar. So, if you care about the semi-transparent top bar, please help us to improve it this cycle, because otherwise it's going away. :) The relevant issue: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/issues/408 Thanks, Allan ___ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
