| 1 |
On Monday, June 4, 2018, Matthias Maier <tamiko@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> On Mon, Jun 4, 2018, at 11:25 CDT, R0b0t1 <r030t1@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> For anyone interested, here is a fairly comprehensive comparison of |
| 6 |
>> self hosting options: https://docs.gitea.io/en-us/comparison/ |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> It is likely gitea is the best. |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> Cheers, |
| 11 |
>> R0b0t1 |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> On Mon, Jun 4, 2018, at 09:56 CDT, Francesco Riosa <vivo75@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
>> In case the need arise, I'm offering to host a 3rd party git |
| 17 |
>> infrastructure, storage and cpu power are available, what it's needed is |
| 18 |
>> an in depth analysis of how it should be built. |
| 19 |
>> |
| 20 |
>> To avoid adding load to infra jobs this should be a totally external |
| 21 |
>> project, this also mean there will be no real benefit comparing it to |
| 22 |
>> current github usage, i.e. all the "pull requests" will need to be |
| 23 |
>> managed by gentoo developers which will have some kind of access to the |
| 24 |
>> server. |
| 25 |
>> |
| 26 |
>> Let me know if there is interest |
| 27 |
>> |
| 28 |
>> Francesco Riosa |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> To answer your two e-mails: |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> We host our critical development infrastructure (including gitolite, |
| 35 |
> master mirror, etc.) exclusively on our own servers under our control. |
| 36 |
> |
| 37 |
> The mirror we provide on github is merely a convenience tool - we do |
| 38 |
> this because we want to enable github users an easy path for sharing |
| 39 |
> contributions (i.e. pull requests). The point here is that we chose |
| 40 |
> github because of its 30 million users (and the fact that nearly |
| 41 |
> everyone who potentially contributes already has a github account). |
| 42 |
> |
| 43 |
> Talking about alternatives is completely missing the mark. |
| 44 |
> |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
I am aware that the GitHub repositories are mirrors. The reason their |
| 47 |
maintenance is tolerated (I assume) is because they provide a web |
| 48 |
interface for contributors. The skin over Git is why the 30 million |
| 49 |
users are there in the first place. |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
There is also e.g. GitLab if the use of preexisting accounts is |
| 52 |
desirable, but it seems the bigger benefit would be issue tracking and |
| 53 |
the online PR interface. Those are obtainable with any number of |
| 54 |
systems in a format similar to GitHub. |
| 55 |
|
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 12:07 PM, Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
| 58 |
> On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 12:37 PM Anthony G. Basile <blueness@g.o> wrote: |
| 59 |
>> |
| 60 |
>> not just the git repos, but the bug reports too. I'm |
| 61 |
>> not sure how to do the latter. |
| 62 |
>> |
| 63 |
> |
| 64 |
> If somebody created a distributed bug tracker that would help a great |
| 65 |
> deal here. The git side is pretty trivial - anybody can just do a |
| 66 |
> clone and they have it all. |
| 67 |
> |
| 68 |
> Bug trackers are still in the dark ages, IMO. |
| 69 |
> |
| 70 |
|
| 71 |
Classical bug trackers do not integrate closely with source control |
| 72 |
systems. GitHub and systems which copy it do, some also adding |
| 73 |
documentation management in the same package. |
| 74 |
|
| 75 |
I have also recommended RedMine. There is less git integration |
| 76 |
(thought it still exists and is useful) but more project management |
| 77 |
features (Gantt charts, feature planning, completion tracking, and so |
| 78 |
on). |
| 79 |
|
| 80 |
It really seems like the motivation to try something else is what is |
| 81 |
missing. That is fine, time is short. But if the main developers and |
| 82 |
project leaders are going to do nothing and prevent everyone else from |
| 83 |
helping eventually help will dry up. Sometimes the project dies |
| 84 |
completely and the world is worse off. Other times gitea splits off of |
| 85 |
gog and work continues. |
| 86 |
|
| 87 |
Cheers, |
| 88 |
R0b0t1 |
Archives