On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 11:12 PM Olivier Churlaud <oliv...@churlaud.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > Le lundi 27 avril 2020, 12:38:42 CEST Aleix Pol a écrit : > > On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 3:41 AM Bhushan Shah <bs...@kde.org> wrote: > > > > > > [Please keep sysad...@kde.org list or bs...@kde.org in the CC for > > > replies] > > > > > > Hello Community members, > > > > > > In view of upcoming Gitlab migration, we sysadmin team wants to share > > > the recommended structuring for the repositories on Gitlab. > > > > > > We had multiple options, > > > > > > - Flat structure: In this option we would have everything under one > > > single namespace/group: https://invent.kde.org/kde/knetwalk > > > - Subgroups under top-level group: In this option we would have a groups > > > under KDE namespace: https://invent.kde.org/kde/games/knetwalk > > > - Groups at top level: In this option we would establish a series of > > > groups at the top level, e.g. https://invent.kde.org/games/knetwalk > > > > > Thank you for having options and talking to us before implementing it. > > > > We have discussed this with small but representative group of > > > contributors or maintainers, and based on their suggestions, we > > > recommend that we go with option 3. Having sub-groups at top level will > > > allow us to, > > > > > > - Provides good visibility on all reviews, tasks and other items within > > > the groups/modules we define > > > - Provides improvements to discoverability of projects > > > - Makes it possible for groups of projects to establish a group level > > > task board should it fit their needs (for tracking a release for > > > instance) > > > - Makes the most semantic sense, as the ‘KDE’ top level group suggested > > > in option 2 is duplicative considering the Gitlab instance is under > > > kde.org. > > > - The discoverability of projects is maximised, as there is no need to > > > open the top level ‘KDE’ group before going into the subgroup. > > > > > > I've worked on draft "move" of the current set of the repositories in > > > their respective subgroups at the repo-metadata project's branch [1]. > > > You can browse the directory structure to get idea of how final > > > structure on Gitlab would look like. > > > > > > If we don't have any objections we would like to implement this next > > > week and move projects to https://invent.kde.org. > > > > > > Thanks! > > > Bhushan for sysadmin team > > > > > > [1] > > > https://cgit.kde.org/sysadmin/repo-metadata.git/tree/projects-invent?h=bshah/invent > > > > Does this mean that to clone it we'll have to go "git clone > > kde:games/knetwalk" or something along the lines? > > > > If that's the case I'd much prefer if we didn't do this, at the moment > > it's already uncomfortable for me to remember the URL for some of the > > repos (e.g. is it sysadmin/ or not?), this will only increase the > > problem and I personally don't see the advantage. > > > > e.g. Is okular graphics or office? Is gwenview plasma or graphics? Is > > krita graphics or its own thing? > > > > I really prefer when I don't have to guess this kind of things when > > fetching a repository. > > > > I 100% agree with Aleix and I think it would also be detrimental for > discoverability, exactly for the examples Aleix just gave. > > We came back from this subgroups ideas some times ago : wiki pages were hard > to find because hidden under layers of groups. The same was true for api > documentations. Now everything is flat and I think it's easier to find. > > Another bad message could also be sent by this: instead of exposing Konsole > or Ark as two applications under the KDE umbrella, it would look like Utils > for KDE, bringing back the KDE Desktop idea (where every application is > already store in a submenu). > > As someone wrote later, if I'm looking for a given application, there is > always the search function...
That requires that you know it exists. We have 1,043 mainline repositories at the moment, which translates to 53 pages of projects under a flat structure system. Reality is nobody is going to page through that looking for something. Please also see my point regarding listing merge requests at the group level - you can see an example of what a flat structure ends up looking like at https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME For those projects that span multiple repositories, you have just denied them any chance or ability to see a listing of everything related to their wider project. > > Best regards, > Olivier > > Aleix > > Cheers, Ben
