Hello, As far as I am concerned, I will never be enthousiastic regarding adopting yet another proprietary platform.
Gil Portenseigne <gil.portensei...@nereide.fr> writes: > +1 to use gitlab features to work around code, that will help > collaboration. > > I don't know if there is an Apache alternative to get the features without > Microsoft. But having two official tools to get contribution is not desired. I agree that we should not have multiple workflow because contributing process is already complex enough to not add yet another option. I think that I we adopt Github workflow, we should abandon Jira. In term of ethics, we would just replace an evil proprietary software with another one, so I won't oppose. :-) > I guess that using existent Github should be ok for official pull > request, if not, it's always ok to have and attached patch or > other gitlab reference. You mean "Github reference" I guess ? > > Le 11:55 - mardi 03 déc., Jacques Le Roux a écrit : >> Le 03/12/2019 à 08:21, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit : >> > Now that we have migrated to Git, in my opinion we should really consider >> > to adopt the workflow based on PR as our primary method for accepting >> > contributions. I understand that it is a relevant change for the community, >> > but I also see many advantages and a more natural (for Git) workflow for >> > contributors and committers. Contributors would fork from the official repo >> > and would submit pull requests that the committers would merge into the >> > official branches. >> > >> I tend to agree, it's simple to merge and commit. We will still maybe need >> Jiras when discussions are needed, or in all cases to fill the blog monthly >> posts? >> >> I guess using Github (ie Microsoft :D) is not a problem for the community? >> >> Opinions are welcome >> >> Jacques >> -- Mathieu Lirzin GPG: F2A3 8D7E EB2B 6640 5761 070D 0ADE E100 9460 4D37
