At my office I run a gitlab server that we use for our projects.
Both the hosted gitlab at http://gitlab.com as a self hosted instance of the
gitlab community edition support multiple ways of signing up (using an openid
account, a company ldap server or let users signup using a mail address.
G'day
On 01/09/2014 21:43, Dave Cridland wrote:
Not all our contributors currently will use github.
Yes that's my case: I haven't a github account, and I definitely don't
want one. Actually I think it would be a shame to use that for XMPP as
it is the exact opposite values: proprietary,
On 01/09/2014 23:26, Evgeny Khramtsov wrote:
Mon, 1 Sep 2014 22:03:43 +0100
Dave Cridland d...@cridland.net wrote:
See Kurt's comment as to one possible reason why.
I use it for both work and pleasure; I'm more in the camp of wanting
to avoid a proprietary outsourced lockin for a core
On 02/09/2014 09:53, Goffi wrote:
G'day
On 01/09/2014 21:43, Dave Cridland wrote:
Not all our contributors currently will use github.
Yes that's my case: I haven't a github account, and I definitely don't
want one. Actually I think it would be a shame to use that for XMPP as
it is the exact
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 7:54 AM, Cramer, E.R. (Eelco)
eelco.cra...@tno.nl wrote:
So it is very well possible to host a service with the same features people
love at github.
There's an assumption running through a lot of posts in this thread
that moving to a github-like pull request model would
Tue, 2 Sep 2014 09:17:05 +0100
Kevin Smith ke...@kismith.co.uk wrote:
On the issue tracker front: Having an issue tracker is sensible, if
people (both the submitters and the people who need to handle the
issues) want one. We set one up years ago, and it fell into disuse so
it's no longer
Tue, 2 Sep 2014 09:17:05 +0100
Kevin Smith ke...@kismith.co.uk wrote:
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 7:54 AM, Cramer, E.R. (Eelco)
eelco.cra...@tno.nl wrote:
So it is very well possible to host a service with the same
features people love at github.
There's an assumption running through a lot of
On 2 September 2014 10:56, Evgeny Khramtsov xramt...@gmail.com wrote:
Tue, 2 Sep 2014 09:17:05 +0100
Kevin Smith ke...@kismith.co.uk wrote:
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 7:54 AM, Cramer, E.R. (Eelco)
eelco.cra...@tno.nl wrote:
So it is very well possible to host a service with the same
Tue, 2 Sep 2014 10:57:44 +0100
Dave Cridland d...@cridland.net wrote:
Just because you disagree with the argument does not make it invalid.
Even though it's valid it doesn't mean it outweighs other arguments.
I do follow the concept that a decentralized open protocol using a
centralized
Tue, 2 Sep 2014 10:58:38 +0100
Dave Cridland d...@cridland.net wrote:
So your argument is that if the procedure doesn't fit the tool, we
should change the procedure?
Sure, why not.
On 2 September 2014 11:05, Evgeny Khramtsov xramt...@gmail.com wrote:
Tue, 2 Sep 2014 10:57:44 +0100
Dave Cridland d...@cridland.net wrote:
Just because you disagree with the argument does not make it invalid.
Even though it's valid it doesn't mean it outweighs other arguments.
No, but
On 2 Sep 2014, at 09:17, Kevin Smith ke...@kismith.co.uk wrote:
There's an assumption running through a lot of posts in this thread
that moving to a github-like pull request model would be a good thing.
Our situation is somewhat different to the typical OSS project hosting
on github. The
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Ashley Ward ashley.w...@surevine.com wrote:
I can imagine a world of fairies and unicorns where (for example) we have an
(openid enabled) gitlab, sufficiently automated that we have a repo per xep
which is writable by the authors, but anyone can raise issues
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 11:27 AM, Kevin Smith ke...@kismith.co.uk wrote:
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 8:12 AM, Ashley Ward ashley.w...@surevine.com wrote:
I think there are enough people talking about his that we could add this to
discuss as a summit agenda item.
Such discussion should really happen
On 2 Sep 2014, at 11:29, Kevin Smith ke...@kismith.co.uk wrote:
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 11:27 AM, Kevin Smith ke...@kismith.co.uk wrote:
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 8:12 AM, Ashley Ward ashley.w...@surevine.com wrote:
I think there are enough people talking about his that we could add this to
On 2 Sep 2014, at 11:28, Kevin Smith ke...@kismith.co.uk wrote:
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Ashley Ward ashley.w...@surevine.com wrote:
I can imagine a world of fairies and unicorns where (for example) we have an
(openid enabled) gitlab, sufficiently automated that we have a repo per xep
On 02/09/2014 11:50, Evgeny Khramtsov wrote:
OK, you're the one. And a lot of people here want github.
And seems like the argument is still the same
all-proprietary-trendy-shiny-things, i.e. no arguments. Proprietary.
So what? Trendy-shiny. And?
I realize that not everybody here use XMPP for
Ok, so, to sum-up a little bit the discussion :
- We all agree that we need a bugtracker to manage the issues related
to each XEP
- This bugtracker have to run with GIT (because the current XMPP repo
is on GIT)
- This bugtracker have to be open-source and deployable on a server
that the XSF
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 12:59 PM, edhelas edhe...@movim.eu wrote:
Ok, so, to sum-up a little bit the discussion :
- We all agree that we need a bugtracker to manage the issues related to
each XEP
I haven't seen much objection to this, as long as it's going to get used.
- This bugtracker have
On 02/09/14 14:08, Kevin Smith wrote:
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 12:59 PM, edhelas edhe...@movim.eu wrote:
Ok, so, to sum-up a little bit the discussion :
- We all agree that we need a bugtracker to manage the issues related to
each XEP
I haven't seen much objection to this, as long as it's going
* Goffi go...@goffi.org [2014-09-02 13:11]:
The data is blocked on the server: is there an easy way to dump everything
(and I mean everything: bug reports, comments, pull requests, etc) and reuse
it without legal restriction ?
Dunno about the legal thing, but yes, a JSON dump of the data can
On Sep 2, 2014, at 3:17 AM, Dave Cridland d...@cridland.net wrote:
I don't know if Kurt would refuse to
As I do XEP work as an employee, it's a personal decision. I'd have to ask my
employer, which I'm not going to until it become necessary.
I note that I would note to my employer that
On 02.09.2014 14:08, Kevin Smith wrote:
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 12:59 PM, edhelas edhe...@movim.eu wrote:
- This bugtracker have to run with GIT (because the current XMPP repo is on
GIT)
That would be the most convenient thing.
Since when do bugtracker run with git?
Are you talking about
On Sep 2, 2014, at 5:56 AM, Kurt Zeilenga kurt.zeile...@isode.com wrote:
On Sep 2, 2014, at 3:17 AM, Dave Cridland d...@cridland.net wrote:
I don't know if Kurt would refuse to
As I do XEP work as an employee, it's a personal decision. I'd have to ask
my employer, which I'm not going
So, do we decide something for the next meeting ?
I don't want to forgot this thing… one more time. We really need a
new tool to track our issues so let's do it !
On mar., sept. 2, 2014 at 4:18 , Kurt Zeilenga
kurt.zeile...@isode.com wrote:
On Sep 2, 2014, at 5:56 AM, Kurt Zeilenga
On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 8:07 PM, edhelas edhe...@movim.eu wrote:
So, do we decide something for the next meeting ?
I don't want to forgot this thing… one more time. We really need a new tool
to track our issues so let's do it !
The Editors are going to discuss if the proposal works for them. If
On Sep 2, 2014, at 12:07 PM, edhelas edhe...@movim.eu wrote:
So, do we decide something for the next meeting ?
I don't want to forgot this thing… one more time.
Forget what? I thought we had consensus before use of an external git repo
would be limited. I don't quite understand why that
On 2 September 2014 21:43, Kurt Zeilenga kurt.zeile...@isode.com wrote:
Personally, I think the value of tracking tools is overrated. But guess
I've been exposed to far too many trackers full of dozens of open issues
which no body has a real plan to address. That said, I don't object to one
Hi all,
There was a bugtracker (JIRA) some years ago, I participated on it.
Cheers,
BOCQUET Ludovic
Le 01/09/2014 16:06, edhelas a écrit :
Hi,
I'm currently looking at our official Wiki (https://wiki.xmpp.org/)
and there's a couple of things that need to be cleaned.
On the main page, the
Hi,
I'm currently looking at our official Wiki (https://wiki.xmpp.org/) and
there's a couple of things that need to be cleaned.
On the main page, the XMPP technologies panel :
- The Client/Server list in https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Tech_pages/BOSH
need to be updated (last change 2010)
- Same
I'd like to also point out that the SSL certificate is not valid for
the host name wiki.xmpp.org, thus leading to browser certificate
errors.
Regards
On Mon, Sep 1, 2014 at 4:06 PM, edhelas edhe...@movim.eu wrote:
Hi,
I'm currently looking at our official Wiki (https://wiki.xmpp.org/) and
Hi,
I appreciate the idea to introduce an issue tracker for XEPs (like Jira).
Reason: I (like many others) have raised several issues on this mailing list,
most of them only minor ones like errors in XML Schemas, errors in examples,
other inconsistencies or mere typos. But afaik none of them
Mon, 1 Sep 2014 19:08:22 +0200
Christian Schudt christian.sch...@gmx.de wrote:
Hi,
I appreciate the idea to introduce an issue tracker for XEPs (like
Jira).
It would be way much easier to move XEPs to github and use the
corresponding github's bug tracker.
Yes I was just thinking of Github too.
The pull request feature is also really nice for :
- Fixing minor issues (typo, english mistake…)
- Proposing improvements for the XEP (changes that require major
version update). Then we can decide that for such request we talk about
it during the
Whilst I agree with you entirely (we could also use Travis to test patches
are valid and publish / updated the website) I believe there are some
potential legal issues that have come up previously.
I *think* the latest gitlab has public repositories but this does not allow
for the fork + pull
On 1 September 2014 20:31, edhelas edhe...@movim.eu wrote:
I didn't get exactly what legal issue we are facing here ? Like the fact
that Github will own the sourcecode ? We can, maybe, look for our own
tracker system like Gitlab yes :)
Maybe we can talk about that during the next summit ?
On 01.09.2014 19:25, Evgeny Khramtsov wrote:
Mon, 1 Sep 2014 19:08:22 +0200
Christian Schudt christian.sch...@gmx.de wrote:
Hi,
I appreciate the idea to introduce an issue tracker for XEPs (like
Jira).
It would be way much easier to move XEPs to github and use the
corresponding
Ok I understand, but there's a couple of opensource Github clones
that we can deploy on one of our servers I think, no ?
On lun., sept. 1, 2014 at 10:08 , Kurt Zeilenga
kurt.zeile...@isode.com wrote:
On Sep 1, 2014, at 12:43 PM, Dave Cridland d...@cridland.net wrote:
On 1 September 2014
Mon, 01 Sep 2014 21:57:42 +0200
Florian Schmaus f...@geekplace.eu wrote:
On 01.09.2014 19:25, Evgeny Khramtsov wrote:
Mon, 1 Sep 2014 19:08:22 +0200
Christian Schudt christian.sch...@gmx.de wrote:
Hi,
I appreciate the idea to introduce an issue tracker for XEPs (like
Jira).
Mon, 1 Sep 2014 19:03:49 +0100
Steven Lloyd Watkin ll...@evilprofessor.co.uk wrote:
Whilst I agree with you entirely (we could also use Travis to test
patches are valid and publish / updated the website) I believe there
are some potential legal issues that have come up previously.
I *think*
Mon, 1 Sep 2014 20:43:57 +0100
Dave Cridland d...@cridland.net wrote:
Not all our contributors currently will use github.
Who will not? And why?
Mon, 1 Sep 2014 22:03:43 +0100
Dave Cridland d...@cridland.net wrote:
See Kurt's comment as to one possible reason why.
I use it for both work and pleasure; I'm more in the camp of wanting
to avoid a proprietary outsourced lockin for a core concern. I don't
mind a mirror on github, but then
On 1 September 2014 22:26, Evgeny Khramtsov xramt...@gmail.com wrote:
Mon, 1 Sep 2014 22:03:43 +0100
Dave Cridland d...@cridland.net wrote:
See Kurt's comment as to one possible reason why.
I use it for both work and pleasure; I'm more in the camp of wanting
to avoid a proprietary
43 matches
Mail list logo
