I will gladly sponsor a server to host on until we get e5 reinstalled and going again.
I think here before a new server is mentioned, we need to see about decide about distribution as that will open up a whole new can of worms Sent from my iPhone > On 26 Sep 2018, at 17:56, Stefan Schmidt <ste...@datenfreihafen.org> wrote: > > Hello. > >> On 9/26/18 5:30 PM, Stephen Houston wrote: >> A. We were assured the server could be provided free of charge. I.E. >> "Sponsored" not bought or paid for as you and raster seem to think >> sponsored means. > > The server you mentioned here is the cloud hosting Mike offered? I read > nothing besides that. No details on who is sponsoring, how long, on a > monthly basis (could be canceled any time) or one big chunk to be > managed by the EFL foundation, etc. > > Relying on sponsorship for critical infrastructure is difficult for an > open source project. Not impossible, but difficult. You basically base > your trust on business decisions not changing in a company. > > Without a clear pledge on the sponsorship level in terms of length and > amount this option sounds really problematic to me. > >> >> B. If you would have spent the last month or so since that Gitlab thread >> started actually testing or using the prototype set up, you would see that >> gitlab provides a web interface for git, so no need for cgit. Obviously >> phab provides a wiki and gitlab provides a wiki so the move from phab to >> gitlab would move phab's wiki to gitlab's wiki. > > I spent time on the thread, looked at the prototype and raised > questions. Not all have been answered nor have they all been fully > dissected. Wiki is per project in Gitlab and not overall like Phab, we > use cgit while phab also offers a git web interface, etc. > > Blaming Marcel for not spending time on the thread is pretty harsh if > many of these things have not been answered and are still in "to be > found out" state. > > Again these are trivial >> things that could have/should have been discussed for the many weeks that >> has thread has been there. CI was also mentioned. It's a huge problem >> with e5 and Stefan explained this. Gitlab has some really good CI tools, >> but obviously that is one of the biggest considerations in moving as Stefan >> clearly laid out. CI with E5 is crap. > > How would Gitlab help with the CI situation? I see no good integration > with things like Travis for it (if I missed it I am happy to get pointed > to it). It basically means we would move our CI over to Gitlab and all > builds run on our infra (cloud/or hardware). That could easily bring > back the overloading problems we had on e5. I am very hesitant in buying > into using Gitlab for CI without enough knowledge about it. > > regards > Stefan Schmidt > > > _______________________________________________ > enlightenment-devel mailing list > enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
