Re: GitLab status update

> > It's more about the readability of the old issues. Those already > have been migrated two times (trac -> redmine -> bugzilla) and are  > really > hard to understand and I'm wondering how bad (nor not) it will get. > I'll check later when I have proper internet access again Uh. That turned

Re: GitLab status update

Yeah :D you have to use LDAP. Nothing changed internally. Your credentials, branches protection, hooks, etc. are all controlled on disk, nothing in GitLab itself. This will be more clear once (if) the mass migration is done, because everyone will get all set up. But definitely we need to put a

Re: GitLab status update

Good point, we had a problem recently because of that. I need to discuss it with Andrea. Best -- Carlos Soriano GNOME Foundation Treasurer, Board of Directors On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 9:24 AM, Michael Catanzaro wrote: > On Fri, Sep 8,

Re: GitLab status update

You can use 2FA in GitLab as an aditional credential to whatever method you use to register (LDAP, G+, GitHub or plain email) 2017-09-08 17:11 GMT+01:00 Carlos Soriano : > Hey Philip, > > Glad you like it! :) > > A question from the ignorance, does two factor authentication

Re: GitLab status update

On Fri, 2017-09-08 at 18:11 +0200, Carlos Soriano wrote: > Hey Philip, > > Glad you like it! :) > > A question from the ignorance, does two factor authentication plays a > role if you use LDAP? If not, probably it's not very useful for the > contributors here around, since we are supposed to use

Re: GitLab status update

Hey Philip, Glad you like it! :) A question from the ignorance, does two factor authentication plays a role if you use LDAP? If not, probably it's not very useful for the contributors here around, since we are supposed to use LDAP and our GNOME account. Best -- Carlos Soriano GNOME Foundation

Re: GitLab status update

On Mon, 2017-09-04 at 15:42 +0200, Carlos Soriano wrote: > Hello all, > > I'm happy to announce our GitLab instance at https://gitlab.gnome.org > /GNOME/ is now officially open to host GNOME projects! Yay! Thanks to everyone who’s worked on this. :-) A reminder that gitlab supports 2-factor

Re: GitLab status update

Yes, feel free to use https://gitlab-test.gnome.org/ as you wish. Also feel free to ask if you need some tweak or test at admin level. You might be interested also to check GitLab itself [0] to see how aprox 30.000 are managed in a single product and the tests I did in our test instance [1],

Re: GitLab status update

Yes, feel free to use https://gitlab-test.gnome.org/ as you wish. Also feel free to ask if you need some tweak or test at admin level. You might be interested also to check GitLab itself [0] to see how aprox 30.000 are managed in a single product and the tests I did in our test instance [1],

Re: GitLab status update

Since there were some comments about missing transparency, I created public bug reports for those projects who requested to be part of the pilot program. You can take a look at them at https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/Infrastructure/issues?label_name%5B%5D=PilotProgramRequest Best -- Carlos Soriano

Re: GitLab status update

On 4 September 2017 at 14:42, Carlos Soriano wrote: > Hello all, > > I'm happy to announce our GitLab instance at https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/ > is now officially open to host GNOME projects! \o/ > Also early attempts to set up CI are being done, and we have

Re: GitLab status update

Hello Jens, Good to know the performance improvements are visible. About Shotwell, it would be in the GNOME group since it's using the cgit and Bugzilla products. With the creation of the External group I don't want to disrupt the current scheme already in use in cgit and Bugzilla, rather open

Re: GitLab status update

In particular, I created a new group named External [2] where we can host projects that are closely related to GNOME and would like to use our infrastructure but are not official GNOME. This is an early attempt to opening ourselves more to a wider world. So far there is only one project, that

Re: GitLab status update

On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 9:51 AM, Andre Klapper wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, 2017-09-05 at 09:33 +0200, Carlos Soriano wrote: > > Issues of the infra are here > > https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/Infrastructure/issues > > Thanks. If that's supposed to be the place where to plans/look up

Re: GitLab status update

Hi, On Tue, 2017-09-05 at 09:33 +0200, Carlos Soriano wrote: > Issues of the infra are here > https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/Infrastructure/issues Thanks. If that's supposed to be the place where to plans/look up tasks related to the migration (e.g. the data migration script), you may want to

Re: GitLab status update

Forgot to mention, https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-i18n/2017- September/msg00015.html must have been in a short period where ssh was not working. Should be fixed since yesterday and no further actions is needed by anyone doing translations. Best -- Carlos Soriano GNOME Foundation

Re: GitLab status update

Hey Andre, Issues of the infra are here https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/Infrastructure/issues and our wiki for migration steps and limitations is on https://wiki.gnome.org/Initiatives/DevelopmentInfrastructure/Migration that I try to update with steps and a small guide for users I'm doing. What

Re: GitLab status update

On Mon, 2017-09-04 at 15:42 +0200, Carlos Soriano wrote: > As always, if you have any question, feel free contact me or reply > here to this email. I'm puzzled that planning and managing all aspects and issues of such a complex migration seems not to be organized in some public task tracker (a