Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)

[Mirko Boehm]

Hi, 

> On 19 Sep 2015, at 15:48, Ivan Čukić  wrote:
> 
>> I've made a wiki page, which says how to turn a pull request into
>> a reviewboard submission.
>> https://techbase.kde.org/Development/GithubMirror
> 
> The next time I see you, you are getting a hug and a pint of apple fritter.

I have been hoping for this more or less through the whole discussion. What 
contributors coming in through Github need is some (ideally scripted) setup of 
their remotes that let’s them easily submit review requests after cloning from 
Github. This cannot be that hard with Git. 

David, you rock. 

Mirko.
-- 
Mirko Boehm | mi...@kde.org | KDE e.V.
FSFE Fellow, FSFE Team Germany
Qt Certified Specialist
Request a meeting: https://doodle.com/mirkoboehm



___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)

[Rajeev Bhatta]

Hi David, 

Nice idea to have a wiki page explaining the process. I was going through the 
text and have some suggestions for some of the text on the wiki page. 

"GitHubMirror
KDE is managing a mirror of projects.kde.org on Github.

We want to make KDE sources easy to find, share and build upon; and most 
importantly we want your contributions to count towards your github profile :)"

GitHub Mirror
"GitHub is a Web-based Git repository hosting service, which offers all of the 
distributed revision control and source code management (SCM) functionality of 
Git as well as adding its own features. Unlike Git, which is strictly a 
command-line tool, GitHub provides a Web-based graphical interface and desktop 
as well as mobile integration. It also provides access control and several 
collaboration features such as bug tracking, feature requests, task management, 
and wikis for every project." ( source. wikipedia ). Github, altough 
proprietary is very popular among different communties and developers. 

We want to make KDE easily available to all so that it is easy to find, share 
and build upon. Therefore KDE is managing a mirror of all its projects, whose 
main location is projects.kde.org, on Github at https://github.com/kde .

The contributions to the KDE project will also count towards your Github 
profile :).

Please let me know if you have any questions/suggestions.

Thanks

On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 13:04:55 +0100
David Edmundson  wrote:

> > >
> > > I was under the impression they were disabled by the options we
> > > had selected. Unfortunately that is not the case.
> >
> > Thanks for clarifying on this.
> >
> > I hope they can still be disabled.
> >
> > They can't. I had spent some time looking before. Sorry.
> 
> However, we have solid hard data that it's a non-issue.
> 
> Gnome has been mirrored on github for nearly 2 years, in that time
> GTK has had a grand total of 4 pull requests over time.
> Most others (gedit, cheese, epiphany) have had 0.
> 
> Interestingly they have had literally hundreds of github "forks",
> which implies it has led to sustantiable numbers of patches back
> using the traditional methods
> 
> I've made a wiki page, which says how to turn a pull request into a
> reviewboard submission.
> https://techbase.kde.org/Development/GithubMirror
> 
> If we get any questions we can then just copy and paste that, and
> don't need to spend any time explaining. Bam, done.
> 
> David


-- 
Rajeev Bhatta 
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)

[David Edmundson]

> >
> > I was under the impression they were disabled by the options we had
> > selected. Unfortunately that is not the case.
>
> Thanks for clarifying on this.
>
> I hope they can still be disabled.
>
> They can't. I had spent some time looking before. Sorry.

However, we have solid hard data that it's a non-issue.

Gnome has been mirrored on github for nearly 2 years, in that time GTK has
had a grand total of 4 pull requests over time.
Most others (gedit, cheese, epiphany) have had 0.

Interestingly they have had literally hundreds of github "forks", which
implies it has led to sustantiable numbers of patches back using the
traditional methods

I've made a wiki page, which says how to turn a pull request into a
reviewboard submission.
https://techbase.kde.org/Development/GithubMirror

If we get any questions we can then just copy and paste that, and don't
need to spend any time explaining. Bam, done.

David
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)

[Teo Mrnjavac]

On Saturday, September 19, 2015 13:04:55 David Edmundson wrote:
> > > I was under the impression they were disabled by the options we had
> > > selected. Unfortunately that is not the case.
> > 
> > Thanks for clarifying on this.
> > 
> > I hope they can still be disabled.
> > 
> > They can't. I had spent some time looking before. Sorry.
> 
> However, we have solid hard data that it's a non-issue.
> 
> Gnome has been mirrored on github for nearly 2 years, in that time GTK has
> had a grand total of 4 pull requests over time.
> Most others (gedit, cheese, epiphany) have had 0.
> 
> Interestingly they have had literally hundreds of github "forks", which
> implies it has led to sustantiable numbers of patches back using the
> traditional methods
> 
> I've made a wiki page, which says how to turn a pull request into a
> reviewboard submission.
> https://techbase.kde.org/Development/GithubMirror
> 
> If we get any questions we can then just copy and paste that, and don't
> need to spend any time explaining. Bam, done.
> 

Thank you David, for your get-things-done approach in this controversial and 
tense situation. It is really much easier to solve than it seems from all 
these threads.

I'm personally in favor of letting projects decide whether to allow GitHub 
pull requests or not, but regardless of the final decision it is good to 
already have practical solutions like this techbase entry.

I find it unfortunate that some long time KDE contributors feel that KDE goals 
are threatened by all this. I understand their concerns, but I assign those 
concerns a different priority score. In fact, the inflexible policy towards 
3rd party (including proprietary) infrastructure and processes we have in KDE 
deters me from bringing some of my own (currently GitHub-hosted) work under 
the KDE umbrella, as this would hinder some very productive working 
relationships with our downstreams and potentially result in *less* free open 
source software being produced, deployed and used.

It is also a fact that KDE is an aging community, and in its future I expect a 
slow decline unless we find a way to bring in a steady influx of new 
contributors. Recruiting a new generation of hackers is something that's just 
not happening fast enough at this point (our yearly GSoC stats are an 
indication of that). GitHub could be a very powerful instrument in turning 
this trend around by tapping into a huge talent pool and pushing people 
towards our own infrastructure while still allowing them to get started 
through an environment they already know.

Cheers,
-- 
Teo Mrnjavac
http://teom.org | t...@kde.org
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring

[Teo Mrnjavac]

On Saturday, September 19, 2015 16:25:13 Luigi Toscano wrote:
> Teo Mrnjavac ha scritto:
> > It is also a fact that KDE is an aging community, and in its future I
> > expect a slow decline unless we find a way to bring in a steady influx of
> > new contributors. Recruiting a new generation of hackers is something
> > that's just not happening fast enough at this point (our yearly GSoC
> > stats are an indication of that). GitHub could be a very powerful
> > instrument in turning this trend around by tapping into a huge talent
> > pool and pushing people towards our own infrastructure while still
> > allowing them to get started through an environment they already know.
> 
> I disagree on this point. Other non-aging projects are staying successfully
> away from Github.
> 

KDE can indeed be a non-aging project without GitHub, I never meant to imply 
otherwise. This is not an all or nothing situation. I'm in favor of improving 
recruiting through other channels as well.

But I believe a GitHub mirror with the option of pull requests can contribute 
to growth, and I'm in favor of using it for this reason.

-- 
Teo Mrnjavac
http://teom.org | t...@kde.org
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)

[Albert Astals Cid]

El Dissabte, 19 de setembre de 2015, a les 16:23:26, Teo Mrnjavac va escriure:
> On Saturday, September 19, 2015 13:04:55 David Edmundson wrote:
> > > > I was under the impression they were disabled by the options we had
> > > > selected. Unfortunately that is not the case.
> > > 
> > > Thanks for clarifying on this.
> > > 
> > > I hope they can still be disabled.
> > > 
> > > They can't. I had spent some time looking before. Sorry.
> > 
> > However, we have solid hard data that it's a non-issue.
> > 
> > Gnome has been mirrored on github for nearly 2 years, in that time GTK has
> > had a grand total of 4 pull requests over time.
> > Most others (gedit, cheese, epiphany) have had 0.
> > 
> > Interestingly they have had literally hundreds of github "forks", which
> > implies it has led to sustantiable numbers of patches back using the
> > traditional methods
> > 
> > I've made a wiki page, which says how to turn a pull request into a
> > reviewboard submission.
> > https://techbase.kde.org/Development/GithubMirror
> > 
> > If we get any questions we can then just copy and paste that, and don't
> > need to spend any time explaining. Bam, done.
> 
> Thank you David, for your get-things-done approach in this controversial and
> tense situation. It is really much easier to solve than it seems from all
> these threads.
> 
> I'm personally in favor of letting projects decide whether to allow GitHub
> pull requests or not, but regardless of the final decision it is good to
> already have practical solutions like this techbase entry.
> 
> I find it unfortunate that some long time KDE contributors feel that KDE
> goals are threatened by all this. I understand their concerns, but I assign
> those concerns a different priority score. In fact, the inflexible policy
> towards 3rd party (including proprietary) infrastructure and processes we
> have in KDE deters me from bringing some of my own (currently
> GitHub-hosted) work under the KDE umbrella, as this would hinder some very
> productive working relationships with our downstreams and potentially
> result in *less* free open source software being produced, deployed and
> used.

That's something you have convinced yourself about, you don't have proof.

Cheers,
  Albert
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

[kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)

[Friedrich W. H. Kossebau]

Hi,

Am Freitag, 18. September 2015, 17:12:12 schrieb Boudhayan Gupta:
> Ladies and gentlemen, as you read this mail github.com/kde is being
> populated by the initial sync of all repositories.

Pardon for the late input, missed the dynamic of the people behind this idea 
(and actually expected it would be shot down, at least to me it seems not a 
good idea to add value to a proprietary platform by also adding our source 
code there).

Can we please only mirror those projects whose maintainers are okay with the 
added workload due to another public interface which allows interaction from 
3rd-party? Too many people will not get that this is only a mirror, even if 
you put it in bold there. Or worse, not accept it is a mirror, because their 
time is more valueable than the time of the maintainers of course.

I have no time (and actually also no interest) to care for people poking via 
github (incl. the time needed to redirect them to the real official KDE 
infrastructure and any bad vibrations because having to argue why I/we do not 
support github really). Other people might have that time and interest, so 
their decision.
But I don't. I joined KDE for some reason and am doing my FLOSS software 
development here, because of certain values.
Same would be true for sourceforge.net, gitlab.com, code.google.com (okay, 
dead) or whereever else some people think we should mirror because it's where 
"the people" are currently.

So as maintainer I would like to have at least the repos of Okteta, 
libkoralle, cagibi removed from the official KDE github page.

Cheers
Friedrich
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)

[David Edmundson]

On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 9:10 PM, Friedrich W. H. Kossebau 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Am Freitag, 18. September 2015, 17:12:12 schrieb Boudhayan Gupta:
> > Ladies and gentlemen, as you read this mail github.com/kde is being
> > populated by the initial sync of all repositories.
>
> Pardon for the late input, missed the dynamic of the people behind this
> idea
> (and actually expected it would be shot down, at least to me it seems not a
> good idea to add value to a proprietary platform by also adding our source
> code there).
>
> Can we please only mirror those projects whose maintainers are okay with
> the
> added workload due to another public interface which allows interaction
> from
> 3rd-party? Too many people will not get that this is only a mirror, even if
> you put it in bold there. Or worse, not accept it is a mirror, because
> their
> time is more valueable than the time of the maintainers of course.
>
>
I have no time (and actually also no interest) to care for people poking via
> github (incl. the time needed to redirect them to the real official KDE
> infrastructure and any bad vibrations because having to argue why I/we do
> not
> support github really). Other people might have that time and interest, so
> their decision.
> But I don't. I joined KDE for some reason and am doing my FLOSS software
> development here, because of certain values.
> Same would be true for sourceforge.net, gitlab.com, code.google.com (okay,
> dead) or whereever else some people think we should mirror because it's
> where
> "the people" are currently.
>
> So as maintainer I would like to have at least the repos of Okteta,
> libkoralle, cagibi removed from the official KDE github page.


There shouldn't be any extra workload.
Can we at least wait until we see if it's a problem before we try and solve
it?

David


Cheers
> Friedrich
> ___
> kde-community mailing list
> kde-community@kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)

[Ben Cooksley]

On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 8:10 AM, Friedrich W. H. Kossebau
 wrote:
> Hi,

Hi,

>
> Am Freitag, 18. September 2015, 17:12:12 schrieb Boudhayan Gupta:
>> Ladies and gentlemen, as you read this mail github.com/kde is being
>> populated by the initial sync of all repositories.
>
> Pardon for the late input, missed the dynamic of the people behind this idea
> (and actually expected it would be shot down, at least to me it seems not a
> good idea to add value to a proprietary platform by also adding our source
> code there).
>
> Can we please only mirror those projects whose maintainers are okay with the
> added workload due to another public interface which allows interaction from
> 3rd-party? Too many people will not get that this is only a mirror, even if
> you put it in bold there. Or worse, not accept it is a mirror, because their
> time is more valueable than the time of the maintainers of course.
>
> I have no time (and actually also no interest) to care for people poking via
> github (incl. the time needed to redirect them to the real official KDE
> infrastructure and any bad vibrations because having to argue why I/we do not
> support github really). Other people might have that time and interest, so
> their decision.
> But I don't. I joined KDE for some reason and am doing my FLOSS software
> development here, because of certain values.
> Same would be true for sourceforge.net, gitlab.com, code.google.com (okay,
> dead) or whereever else some people think we should mirror because it's where
> "the people" are currently.
>
> So as maintainer I would like to have at least the repos of Okteta,
> libkoralle, cagibi removed from the official KDE github page.

Sorry, but an incomplete mirror would cost additional effort to
maintain, as sysadmin would have to maintain a list of repositories
which were blacklisted.
Note that because a chunk of the code that drives this is in bash, it
is not easy to create such a list easily.

Additionally, an incomplete mirror would be confusing to those who
expect the mirror to be complete - so this blacklist would result in
Sysadmin receving queries of "why isn't this repository on Github?".

I suggest you instead put a clear notice in the README file noting
that patches and other code contributions should be submitted via our
usual infrastructure.
If people do ignore that notice and submit stuff via Github pull
requests, they can be handled by the bot suggested on the other thread
- or simply ignored (as the person failed to read our instructions).

>
> Cheers
> Friedrich

Regards,
Ben

> ___
> kde-community mailing list
> kde-community@kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)

[Jaroslaw Staniek]

On 18 September 2015 at 23:15, Ivan Čukić  wrote:
> We should probably put something like LLVM guys did in the project
> description instead of actually having the real description.
>
> https://github.com/llvm-mirror/llvm
>> Mirror of official llvm git repository located at
>> http://llvm.org/git/llvm. Updated every five minutes.
>> http://llvm.org
>

Sure, this is a github's own "Description" field: http://i.imgur.com/VjlXn3c.png
It supports 3 lines of text or so plus a website filed.

The "Website" field could be set to a project's home page;
projects.kde.org/* as default but maybe something better grabbed from
our metadata, e.g. https://community.kde.org/Frameworks for KF5.

So do we still need to alter the READMEs?

-- 
regards, Jaroslaw Staniek

KDE:
: A world-wide network of software engineers, artists, writers, translators
: and facilitators committed to Free Software development - http://kde.org
Calligra Suite:
: A graphic art and office suite - http://calligra.org
Kexi:
: A visual database apps builder - http://calligra.org/kexi
Qt Certified Specialist:
: http://www.linkedin.com/in/jstaniek
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)

[Ben Cooksley]

On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Jaroslaw Staniek  wrote:
> On 18 September 2015 at 22:37, Ben Cooksley  wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 8:10 AM, Friedrich W. H. Kossebau
>>  wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>>>
>>> Am Freitag, 18. September 2015, 17:12:12 schrieb Boudhayan Gupta:
 Ladies and gentlemen, as you read this mail github.com/kde is being
 populated by the initial sync of all repositories.
>>>
>>> Pardon for the late input, missed the dynamic of the people behind this idea
>>> (and actually expected it would be shot down, at least to me it seems not a
>>> good idea to add value to a proprietary platform by also adding our source
>>> code there).
>>>
>>> Can we please only mirror those projects whose maintainers are okay with the
>>> added workload due to another public interface which allows interaction from
>>> 3rd-party? Too many people will not get that this is only a mirror, even if
>>> you put it in bold there. Or worse, not accept it is a mirror, because their
>>> time is more valueable than the time of the maintainers of course.
>>>
>>> I have no time (and actually also no interest) to care for people poking via
>>> github (incl. the time needed to redirect them to the real official KDE
>>> infrastructure and any bad vibrations because having to argue why I/we do 
>>> not
>>> support github really). Other people might have that time and interest, so
>>> their decision.
>>> But I don't. I joined KDE for some reason and am doing my FLOSS software
>>> development here, because of certain values.
>>> Same would be true for sourceforge.net, gitlab.com, code.google.com (okay,
>>> dead) or whereever else some people think we should mirror because it's 
>>> where
>>> "the people" are currently.
>>>
>>> So as maintainer I would like to have at least the repos of Okteta,
>>> libkoralle, cagibi removed from the official KDE github page.
>>
>> Sorry, but an incomplete mirror would cost additional effort to
>> maintain, as sysadmin would have to maintain a list of repositories
>> which were blacklisted.
>> Note that because a chunk of the code that drives this is in bash, it
>> is not easy to create such a list easily.
>>
>> Additionally, an incomplete mirror would be confusing to those who
>> expect the mirror to be complete - so this blacklist would result in
>> Sysadmin receving queries of "why isn't this repository on Github?".
>>
>
> Wouldn't lack of opt-in from Friedrich just mean that the bot will be
> enabled with a friendly note (i.e. the default)?
> Allright, he (and his projects' members) won't be 'spammed'.
>
>> I suggest you instead put a clear notice in the README file noting
>> that patches and other code contributions should be submitted via our
>> usual infrastructure.
>
> This addition to README.md could be hopefully scripted in a clever way
> as we have so many projects.
> Myself I use README.md files for some time as KF5 do, so replacing
> these a whole README.md with a standard disclaimer is not an option;
> just saying, I know you did not mean replacing of couse.
> I'd welcome a nicely crafted template.

+1. Note that Phabricator, once we roll it out will also display the
content of README.md files - so please ensure such a template is
crafted in such a way that people can clearly understand what is meant
if they're browsing the repository via Phabricator in the future.

>
> --
> regards, Jaroslaw Staniek

Thanks,
Ben

>
> KDE:
> : A world-wide network of software engineers, artists, writers, translators
> : and facilitators committed to Free Software development - http://kde.org
> Calligra Suite:
> : A graphic art and office suite - http://calligra.org
> Kexi:
> : A visual database apps builder - http://calligra.org/kexi
> Qt Certified Specialist:
> : http://www.linkedin.com/in/jstaniek
> ___
> kde-community mailing list
> kde-community@kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)

[Jaroslaw Staniek]

On 18 September 2015 at 22:37, Ben Cooksley  wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 8:10 AM, Friedrich W. H. Kossebau
>  wrote:
>> Hi,
>
> Hi,
>
>>
>> Am Freitag, 18. September 2015, 17:12:12 schrieb Boudhayan Gupta:
>>> Ladies and gentlemen, as you read this mail github.com/kde is being
>>> populated by the initial sync of all repositories.
>>
>> Pardon for the late input, missed the dynamic of the people behind this idea
>> (and actually expected it would be shot down, at least to me it seems not a
>> good idea to add value to a proprietary platform by also adding our source
>> code there).
>>
>> Can we please only mirror those projects whose maintainers are okay with the
>> added workload due to another public interface which allows interaction from
>> 3rd-party? Too many people will not get that this is only a mirror, even if
>> you put it in bold there. Or worse, not accept it is a mirror, because their
>> time is more valueable than the time of the maintainers of course.
>>
>> I have no time (and actually also no interest) to care for people poking via
>> github (incl. the time needed to redirect them to the real official KDE
>> infrastructure and any bad vibrations because having to argue why I/we do not
>> support github really). Other people might have that time and interest, so
>> their decision.
>> But I don't. I joined KDE for some reason and am doing my FLOSS software
>> development here, because of certain values.
>> Same would be true for sourceforge.net, gitlab.com, code.google.com (okay,
>> dead) or whereever else some people think we should mirror because it's where
>> "the people" are currently.
>>
>> So as maintainer I would like to have at least the repos of Okteta,
>> libkoralle, cagibi removed from the official KDE github page.
>
> Sorry, but an incomplete mirror would cost additional effort to
> maintain, as sysadmin would have to maintain a list of repositories
> which were blacklisted.
> Note that because a chunk of the code that drives this is in bash, it
> is not easy to create such a list easily.
>
> Additionally, an incomplete mirror would be confusing to those who
> expect the mirror to be complete - so this blacklist would result in
> Sysadmin receving queries of "why isn't this repository on Github?".
>

Wouldn't lack of opt-in from Friedrich just mean that the bot will be
enabled with a friendly note (i.e. the default)?
Allright, he (and his projects' members) won't be 'spammed'.

> I suggest you instead put a clear notice in the README file noting
> that patches and other code contributions should be submitted via our
> usual infrastructure.

This addition to README.md could be hopefully scripted in a clever way
as we have so many projects.
Myself I use README.md files for some time as KF5 do, so replacing
these a whole README.md with a standard disclaimer is not an option;
just saying, I know you did not mean replacing of couse.
I'd welcome a nicely crafted template.

-- 
regards, Jaroslaw Staniek

KDE:
: A world-wide network of software engineers, artists, writers, translators
: and facilitators committed to Free Software development - http://kde.org
Calligra Suite:
: A graphic art and office suite - http://calligra.org
Kexi:
: A visual database apps builder - http://calligra.org/kexi
Qt Certified Specialist:
: http://www.linkedin.com/in/jstaniek
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)

[Martin Steigerwald]

Hello Friedrich,

Am Freitag, 18. September 2015, 23:22:41 CEST schrieb Friedrich W. H. 
Kossebau:
> For the first, my answer is not: mirror on github, but rather: make this
> info  better accessable (heck, perhaps simply put in the About dialog, in a
> new tab "Developers").

I think its even possible to just mentioning that in any github.com/kde page.

"You are looking for our code on github.com?

We don´t use github.com due to …, but you can find out code on … and we also 
have a nice way to provide reviews in … and our task and project management is 
at …

We look forward to your contributions."

So I see no need to provide an actual mirror of the source code in order to 
point to KDE infrastructure.


I was a bit confused as first there was talk about disabling pull requests. 
Yet now the github.com/kde mirror is up, but I also read its not possible to 
disable pull requests. I´d expected that someone would check this before the 
move.


Anyway, for bug triaging I will just look at bugzilla for now. And since I 
didn´t write more than a few lines of code so far, except for this idea I 
leave this discussion to those who contributed more code.

Thanks,
-- 
Martin
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)

[Friedrich W. H. Kossebau]

Am Samstag, 19. September 2015, 08:37:54 schrieb Ben Cooksley:
> On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 8:10 AM, Friedrich W. H. Kossebau
> 
>  wrote:
> > Am Freitag, 18. September 2015, 17:12:12 schrieb Boudhayan Gupta:
> > Can we please only mirror those projects whose maintainers are okay with
> > the added workload due to another public interface which allows
> > interaction from 3rd-party? Too many people will not get that this is
> > only a mirror, even if you put it in bold there. Or worse, not accept it
> > is a mirror, because their time is more valueable than the time of the
> > maintainers of course.
> > 
> > I have no time (and actually also no interest) to care for people poking
> > via github (incl. the time needed to redirect them to the real official
> > KDE infrastructure and any bad vibrations because having to argue why
> > I/we do not support github really). Other people might have that time and
> > interest, so their decision.
> > But I don't. I joined KDE for some reason and am doing my FLOSS software
> > development here, because of certain values.
> > Same would be true for sourceforge.net, gitlab.com, code.google.com (okay,
> > dead) or whereever else some people think we should mirror because it's
> > where "the people" are currently.
> > 
> > So as maintainer I would like to have at least the repos of Okteta,
> > libkoralle, cagibi removed from the official KDE github page.
> 
> Sorry, but an incomplete mirror would cost additional effort to
> maintain, as sysadmin would have to maintain a list of repositories
> which were blacklisted.

Could that effort not be crowd-sourced, as with the build metadata?

> Note that because a chunk of the code that drives this is in bash, it
> is not easy to create such a list easily.
> 
> Additionally, an incomplete mirror would be confusing to those who
> expect the mirror to be complete - so this blacklist would result in
> Sysadmin receving queries of "why isn't this repository on Github?".

Who would expect the mirror to be complete? Besides, that could be mentioned 
in the description on github.com/KDE:

"Official mirror of the KDE project. Only contains repos of projects whose 
maintainers support it."

And "KDE Github Mirror" perhaps should be "KDE Github Readonly Mirror".

> I suggest you instead put a clear notice in the README file noting
> that patches and other code contributions should be submitted via our
> usual infrastructure.

People do not read READMEs, I lost my hopes there at least. Because most 
READMEs are outdated/unmaintained. So not really sure people can be blamed for 
that behaviour.

> If people do ignore that notice and submit stuff via Github pull
> requests, they can be handled by the bot suggested on the other thread
> - or simply ignored (as the person failed to read our instructions).

Which opens a chance for people being pissed off because their effort on 
creating a patch is ignored, when they just missed the note that it's not 
possible. And I do not like to piss off people. But I also do not like using 
github for my FLOSS work. So now I feel forced to support people on github -> 
me not happy, questioning KDE values.

So if I look at the problems presented initially in look for a solution:
* people not finding our git repositories
* people being surprised that our code is not on github
* some projects starting to use github in addition to our own infrastructure

For the first, my answer is not: mirror on github, but rather: make this info 
better accessable (heck, perhaps simply put in the About dialog, in a new tab 
"Developers").
People who are surprised our code is not on github: have a page explaining 
why. Education is needed.
If some projects started to use github, they might have specific needs, which 
should be investigated and learned from how we could improve our 
infrastructure to meet that.

I miss to see why e.g. Okteta code should be mirrored on github officially by 
KDE, if the full power of github is not used. This does not make any sense to 
me. Who is targetted here, for what?

I only see lose-lose, making ourselves feel our infrastructure is anything but 
usable and giving a bad experience on github ("suckers just have bots telling 
me to represent my patch in some alien infrastructure that I first have to 
learn now additionally, why here and not using github?!1").

Cheers
Friedrich
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

Re: [kde-community] Have repo maintainers opt-in for github mirroring (was: Re: Official KDE mirror on github)

[Ben Cooksley]

On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 10:02 AM, Martin Steigerwald
 wrote:
> Hello Friedrich,

Hi Martin,

>
> Am Freitag, 18. September 2015, 23:22:41 CEST schrieb Friedrich W. H.
> Kossebau:
>> For the first, my answer is not: mirror on github, but rather: make this
>> info  better accessable (heck, perhaps simply put in the About dialog, in a
>> new tab "Developers").
>
> I think its even possible to just mentioning that in any github.com/kde page.
>
> "You are looking for our code on github.com?
>
> We don´t use github.com due to …, but you can find out code on … and we also
> have a nice way to provide reviews in … and our task and project management is
> at …
>
> We look forward to your contributions."
>
> So I see no need to provide an actual mirror of the source code in order to
> point to KDE infrastructure.

Unfortunately they have a limit on the description length we can place
there of 120 characters.

>
>
> I was a bit confused as first there was talk about disabling pull requests.
> Yet now the github.com/kde mirror is up, but I also read its not possible to
> disable pull requests. I´d expected that someone would check this before the
> move.

I was under the impression they were disabled by the options we had
selected. Unfortunately that is not the case.

>
>
> Anyway, for bug triaging I will just look at bugzilla for now. And since I
> didn´t write more than a few lines of code so far, except for this idea I
> leave this discussion to those who contributed more code.

Github Issues are not enabled, so this won't be a problem.

>
> Thanks,
> --
> Martin

Cheers,
Ben

> ___
> kde-community mailing list
> kde-community@kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
___
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community