On Wed, Apr 29, 2020, 10:19 AM Boudewijn Rempt <b...@valdyas.org> wrote:
> On woensdag 29 april 2020 15:16:12 CEST Adriaan de Groot wrote: > > On 2020 prilula d. 29id 06:46:55 CEST Bhushan Shah wrote: > > > We have gotten a request for namespacing from projects on multiple > > > occassion, in cgit our workaround has always been that we prefix the > > > repo name with namespace- (i.e wikitolearn-courses-backend). > > > > > > While this works out with our current workflow, it is not really > > > optimal. I've also mentioned various new contributor focused > > > requirements which lead us to this proposal for structuring in previous > > > emails. > > > > > > Your mention of namespaces reminds me that there was **also** a > discussion in > > this thread about workboards and reviews. > > > > GitLab can have **one** workboard per group. So depending on how the > > categories / namespaces work out, we have choices in the overall number > of > > workboards: > Not sure what your referring to but kdiff3 has a workboard setup that is not group level. I'll have another look at how this is setup. > > > - one big one (flat) > > - one per (sub)group / namespace > > > > We should look at this as well. Arguments I've seen in this thread > > > > - one big one is unmanageably large > > - (sub)communities have asked for smaller (split) workboards > > - split workboards make it harder to work over group boundaries > > - one big one allows moving reviews and tasks to where they belong > > Outch, that's a nasty one. I thought there was a workboard per > repository... And most of the proposed groups actually aren't really > subcommunities in any case, just bags of holding for vaguely similar > projects. > > -- > https://www.valdyas.org | https://www.krita.org > > >