| 1 |
On 10/09/2015 01:56 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote: |
| 2 |
> Well let's think about this. If github went away, or we needed to part |
| 3 |
> ways with github, what we would we want to keep from their site? |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
It is more likely that our infra servers go down or break than github. |
| 6 |
From a reliability standpoint, our infra servers clearly lose. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
> An |
| 9 |
> example is all the discussion on "The Crystal Programming Language" pull |
| 10 |
> #105. That discussion should have happened on our bugzilla so we have |
| 11 |
> that history on our own infra. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
I don't see why that discussion should have happened on bugzilla. |
| 14 |
Reviews on bugzilla are painful and broken. And it's not a global matter. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
I can and will review (new) ebuilds anywhere I please, including private |
| 17 |
mails from my proxied maintainers (some use that workflow) or mails to |
| 18 |
project aliases (which are only semi-public), although it's preferred |
| 19 |
that the information is public. Information on who has reviewed the |
| 20 |
ebuild are supposed to go into the git merge commit message, so you can |
| 21 |
always contact the reviewer. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
> Can we get the gentoo-bot to organize email notifications in such |
| 24 |
> a way that we can easily search and read histories by issues and/or |
| 25 |
> pull requests? |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
The gentoo-bot already gets those mail notifications (I guess? can |
| 28 |
mgorny confirm?), so the data would already be there, just needs to be |
| 29 |
processed. But that's not something that needs to happen overnight, |
| 30 |
since there is no data loss imminent. |
Archives