Hi all, Regardless of gitlab vs phab while Bertrand has done a great job for a long time I think that rebuilding our infra on a more mainstream distro makes a lot of sense, because it will be much easier to document and for more people to understand. Whether it ends up being Centos, openSUSE Leap or Debian doesn't really matter to me but I think those three are the ones that make the most sense atleast for the bare metal machine.
If we decide that we would like to migrate to gitlab, then as Jonathan has said setting up a temporary machine that will look and feel like whatever we eventually want for our infra migrating to gitlab on that machine, then giving us the time to get our core infra back into shape and migrating back when its ready makes alot of sense. On 27/09/2018 03:29, Jonathan Aquilina wrote: > 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 > -- Simon Lees (Simotek) http://simotek.net Emergency Update Team keybase.io/simotek SUSE Linux Adelaide Australia, UTC+10:30 GPG Fingerprint: 5B87 DB9D 88DC F606 E489 CEC5 0922 C246 02F0 014B
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
