SVN - I think we should be moving away from it. If we switch to a host that has specialized GIT+SVN support, it will be hard to move away to another provider that doesn't have elaborate SVN features.
Agree with Martin re moving closer to API & MW in general. Hosting on MW gives us a very different status than 30+ MW API libraries on the web. We should be using our expertise in building the core product, and reduce user's confusion of which one to pick (all else being equal). Auto-build & test - would love that. I have already set up a labs project mediawiki-api, we could do major experimentation there. Gerrit is hard, true, but with time we will build enough documentation to make it easy. Also I wonder if we will be able to use MW hosting without Gerrit - by allowing direct master commits. --Yurik On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Maarten Dammers <maar...@mdammers.nl>wrote: > Hoi Merlijn, > > Op 26-12-2012 13:28, Merlijn van Deen schreef: > > Hello all, >> >> As you might know, the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF) has moved most >> Mediawiki (MW)-related repositories from svn version control to git + >> gerrit. As a consequence, the WMF also wants to stop running their svn >> server - which is the server we are using. >> > No planned date yet so we don't have to rush anything. > > >> Now the question is: where do we want to move to, and what version >> control system (vcs) do we want to use? Do we find that the WMF >> gerrit-based system is user-friendly and easy enough? Do we care about >> having svn-based access? >> >> I think there are a few options we can consider: >> >> 1) go with the gerrit flow: convert the repository to git and host the >> repositories with the WMF. This has the advantage of having the >> repository in a practical place (with all the other MW related >> repositories). >> > +1 > > >> 2) move to github: convert to git, and host the repository at github. >> This has the advantage of the user-friendlyness of github, but also >> gives us SVN access. We can always easily move to WMF-based hosting >> once we feel it is user-friendly enough: the github repository will >> then just mirror the WM=F-hosted repository. >> > -1, I would like to keep everything together in one central place, don't > scatter it all over the internet. Kill Sourceforge and have everything like > Mediawiki. > It's not that I like Gerrit and Bugzilla that much, but I hate to be on > yet another website. > One of the things to consider too is the automatic testing. We could > slowly start deploying that so every commit gets checked and maybe in the > future we're able to detect stuff like https://bugzilla.wikimedia.** > org/show_bug.cgi?id=43177<https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43177>. > We should be moving closer to Mediawiki and the api, not away from it. > > >> 3) move to another SVN host. This is easier (we don't need to convert >> any repository), but it also means that it will be hard to move to >> WMF-based hosting when we want. In addition, we don't get the nice >> things git gives us: easy branching and easy patch submission ('pull >> requests'). >> > -1, per above. > > Maarten > > > > ______________________________**_________________ > Pywikipedia-l mailing list > Pywikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.**org <Pywikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/pywikipedia-l<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/pywikipedia-l> >
_______________________________________________ Pywikipedia-l mailing list Pywikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/pywikipedia-l
