Hey All,
Sorry for my confusion, but I'm a bit unclear as to when we're meant to
start working against the GHC repo on the gitlab.haskell.org instance. I
had in mind that the cutover was intended to be the 18th, but going on
there it still appears as if it's mirrored from git.haskell.org. Can
some
Hi all,
As I'm wrapping up some ICFP papers, I realize that I sometimes link to Trac
tickets in published papers. It would be a shame for all these links to
suddenly go dead, and I'm sure that my papers aren't the only places external
sites link to Trac. Is it expected that, after the full migr
following things are ready:
* Hosting of GHC's repositories and those of its mirrors have been
prepared.
* Continuous integration has been configured for GHC.
All-in-all the GitLab migration has been quite timely since we were
recently notified by CircleCI of billing changes which
(To: Ben added directly)
Yes, https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc still seems to mirror
https://:*@git.haskell.org/ghc, so the cutover is not complete
yet.
OTOH, the Gitlab instance allowed me to merge a request (which did not
work yesterday), so /something/ has changed. The interesting
conseq
How curious! Some clarification would definitely be appreciated.
_ara
> On 20 Dec 2018, at 17:40, Gabor Greif wrote:
>
> (To: Ben added directly)
>
> Yes, https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc still seems to mirror
> https://:*@git.haskell.org/ghc, so the cutover is not complete
> yet.
>
>
Ara Adkins writes:
> Hey All,
>
> Sorry for my confusion, but I'm a bit unclear as to when we're meant to
> start working against the GHC repo on the gitlab.haskell.org instance. I
> had in mind that the cutover was intended to be the 18th, but going on
> there it still appears as if it's mirrore
Perfect. Thanks for the clarification Ben!
_ara
> On 21 Dec 2018, at 16:55, Ben Gamari wrote:
>
> Ara Adkins writes:
>
>> Hey All,
>>
>> Sorry for my confusion, but I'm a bit unclear as to when we're meant to
>> start working against the GHC repo on the gitlab.haskell.org instance. I
>> had
Richard Eisenberg writes:
> Hi all,
>
> As I'm wrapping up some ICFP papers, I realize that I sometimes link
> to Trac tickets in published papers. It would be a shame for all these
> links to suddenly go dead, and I'm sure that my papers aren't the only
> places external sites link to Trac. Is i
Hi,
Am Montag, den 17.12.2018, 00:29 -0500 schrieb Ben Gamari:
> 2. We begin officially accepting merge requests on this fresh GitLab
> instance on Tuesday. At this point gitlab.haskell.org:ghc/ghc will
> become GHC's official upstream repository.
I guess this works only because GitLab h
Hello everyone,
I have started the process of migrating GHC's Trac content to GitLab.
GitLab (gitlab.haskell.org) and Trac (ghc.haskell.org) will be down
until this process has finished. I will post updates as necessary.
However, if you do need to refer to a ticket, you are welcome to use the
sta
Hi Ben,
I was wondering why my pull request (merely to trigger a bit more of
CI than what I have at my local disposal) was suddenly failing (1),
when it worked in a previous incarnation (2).
It turns out that either CI or the entire tree is broken since (3)
being the last sound one.
Looks like x
Gabor Greif writes:
> Hi Ben,
>
Hi Gabor,
> I was wondering why my pull request (merely to trigger a bit more of
> CI than what I have at my local disposal) was suddenly failing (1),
> when it worked in a previous incarnation (2).
>
> It turns out that either CI or the entire tree is broken sinc
Hi Ben,
thanks for the explanation, that indeed makes sense. I suspected some
runaway optimisation, since the GHC seemed to crash on the same small
set of sources.
On a related note, even after rebasing to master, the linter of
ghc/ghc!10 doesn't appear to kick in, blocking (and timing out) the
t
(following-up own mail)
This seems resolved too. I have submitted my branch into the main
repo, and now the pipeline is executing :-)
Still, do we want running pipelines for external contributors too?
Gabor
On 12/22/18, Gabor Greif wrote:
> Hi Ben,
>
> thanks for the explanation, that inde
Gabor Greif writes:
> (following-up own mail)
>
> This seems resolved too. I have submitted my branch into the main
> repo, and now the pipeline is executing :-)
>
> Still, do we want running pipelines for external contributors too?
>
Indeed we do. Small oversight on my part; now fixed.
Thanks!
Yeah, it starts now, thanks!
However it won't terminate due to a restrictive time limit of 60 mins.
Can we have 120?
Gabor
On 12/22/18, Ben Gamari wrote:
> Gabor Greif writes:
>
>> (following-up own mail)
>>
>> This seems resolved too. I have submitted my branch into the main
>> repo, and
Gabor, you can configure this yourself.
1. Go to https://gitlab.haskell.org/ggreif/ghc/settings/ci_cd
2. Expand the top drop-down "General pipelines"
3. Set the timeout to 6h
On Sun, Dec 23, 2018 at 2:30 PM Gabor Greif wrote:
>
> Yeah, it starts now, thanks!
>
> However it won't terminate due to
Gabor Greif writes:
> Yeah, it starts now, thanks!
>
> However it won't terminate due to a restrictive time limit of 60 mins.
> Can we have 120?
>
I have actually changed the default to six hours since Windows builds tend
to easily eat through three hours at least. I've made this change on
your f
ree to open a ticket here [1].
Cheers,
- Ben
[1] https://gitlab.haskell.org/bgamari/gitlab-migration/issues
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
ghc-devs mailing list
ghc-devs@haskell.org
http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
users; GHC developers; Haskell Cafe
Subject: Re: Trac to GitLab migration underway
Ben Gamari writes:
> Hello everyone,
>
> I have started the process of migrating GHC's Trac content to GitLab.
> GitLab (gitlab.haskell.org) and Trac (ghc.haskell.org) will be down
> until this
il this process has finished. I will post updates as necessary.
> >
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm happy to announce that the ticket and issue import processes are now
> complete and gitlab.haskell.org is back online.
>
[...]
Thanks for your hard work!
> Cheers,
>
>
>> >
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I'm happy to announce that the ticket and issue import processes are now
>> complete and gitlab.haskell.org is back online.
> [...]
>
> Thanks for your hard work!
>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> - Ben
>>
>
| I'm happy to announce that the ticket and issue import processes are now
| complete and gitlab.haskell.org is back online. There are still a few
| final steps remaining which I will be carrying out over the next few
| days:
Great! I'm sure it'll help to have everything in one place.
Can I
> * That the old ticket repo be put in read-only mode. I've just modified the
> old #16344, but I should have modified the new one.
That is tracked https://gitlab.haskell.org/bgamari/gitlab-migration/issues/14
It seems that there are still some problems to iron out though.
>
---Original Message-
| From: Matthew Pickering
| Sent: 11 March 2019 09:37
| To: Simon Peyton Jones
| Cc: Ben Gamari ; GHC developers
| Subject: Re: Trac to GitLab migration underway
|
| > * That the old ticket repo be put in read-only mode. I've just modified
| the o
it another discipline we could impose on ourselves?
>
> Simon
>
> | -Original Message-
> | From: Matthew Pickering
> | Sent: 11 March 2019 09:37
> | To: Simon Peyton Jones
> | Cc: Ben Gamari ; GHC developers
> | Subject: Re: Trac to GitLab migration und
;> same issue, will there be many such lines?
>>
>> Or is it another discipline we could impose on ourselves?
>>
>> Simon
>>
>> | -Original Message-
>> | From: Matthew Pickering
>> | Sent: 11 March 2019 09:37
&g
> the
> >> | UI.
> >>
> >> I don't get it. You manually added "Corresponding MR !509" to the
> issue Description. Or are you saying that that apparently-user-written
> line was added by GitLab? If you have many MRs taht mention (perhaps en
> passa
; added by GitLab? If you have many MRs taht mention (perhaps en passant)
> >> the same issue, will there be many such lines?
> >>
> >> Or is it another discipline we could impose on ourselves?
> >>
> >> Simon
> >>
> >> |
d be
>> created from
>> >> | it to the ticket.
>> >> |
>> >> | For example, when I mentioned !509 on this ticket it now displays
>> in the
>> >> | UI.
>> >>
>> >> I don't get it. You manually added "Corresponding MR
hen a reference should be created
>> >> from
>> >> | it to the ticket.
>> >> |
>> >> | For example, when I mentioned !509 on this ticket it now displays in
>> >> the
>> >> | UI.
>> >>
>> >> I don'
Simon Peyton Jones via ghc-devs writes:
> | I'm happy to announce that the ticket and issue import processes are now
> | complete and gitlab.haskell.org is back online. There are still a few
> | final steps remaining which I will be carrying out over the next few
> | days:
>
> Great! I'm sur
2019 20:43
To: Artem Pelenitsyn
Cc: GHC developers
Subject: Re: Trac to GitLab migration underway
Good point -- I hadn't noticed the unfortunate phrasing of the original post.
You're right that the current focus is on email, but the tabs issue affects me,
too. In any case, let's n
Richard Eisenberg writes:
> Thanks to all who have made this happen. Looking forward to having
> everything in one place!
>
> Do we have any ability to edit the formatting of subject lines of
> ticket emails? It would be great if we could get the (!234) or
> (#12345) up front, as this is the effe
Richard Eisenberg writes:
> Good point -- I hadn't noticed the unfortunate phrasing of the
> original post.
>
> You're right that the current focus is on email, but the tabs issue
> affects me, too. In any case, let's not link to that ticket.
>
> But before I take further action, I know that we h
ed to
make a custom query.
I have done an example here:
https://gitlab.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/wikis/partial-type-signatures
Simon
| -Original Message-
| From: Ben Gamari
| Sent: 11 March 2019 22:37
| To: Simon Peyton Jones ; GHC developers
| Subject: RE: Trac to GitLab migration und
> On Mar 11, 2019, at 8:13 PM, Ben Gamari wrote:
>
> Richard Eisenberg writes:
> For instance, consider the case of
> #16347 [1]. You will note that below the "Related issues" section there
> is a list of related merge requests (strangely formatted completely
> differently).
Aha. That's exactl
Hi all,
Question, how do I view only Windows issues? I see there is a windows tag
but nothing is linked to it. And tickets contain sporadically the "Trac
Metadata" field.
So I'm not sure how to get the same overview I used on trac.
Kind regards,
Tamar
On Tue, Mar 12, 2019, 18:42 Richard Eisenbe
gt;
> * Continuous integration has been configured for GHC.
>
>All-in-all the GitLab migration has been quite timely since we were
>recently notified by CircleCI of billing changes which will soon make
>it quite difficult for us to continue using their services (see t
ve been hard at work preparing the
> migration to GitLab. Currently the following things are ready:
>
> * Hosting of GHC's repositories and those of its mirrors have been
>prepared.
>
> * Continuous integration has been configured for GHC.
>
>All-in-all the Git
Simon Jakobi via ghc-devs writes:
> Hi Ben,
>
> in my experience Gitlab has been extremely slow at showing commit diffs to
> the point that it gives up and returns a 502:
> https://gitlab.staging.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/issues/15944
>
> Is this possibly related to any resource constraints on our inst
Simon Marlow writes:
> Hi Ben - this sounds good, a couple of questions:
>
> - What about the performance issue we noticed last week?
I identified the problem as being the ARM environment which the staging
instance is running on. The final instance will run on x86_64.
> - What will happen to Ph
> On Dec 17, 2018, at 10:52 AM, Ben Gamari wrote:
>
>>
>> - What will happen to Phabricator diffs that are still mid-review? It would
>> be a shame to have to move them to gitlab and interrupt the review trail.
>> Can't we just shut Phabricator to new diffs but keep the possibility of
>> worki
s we have been hard at work preparing the
>> migration to GitLab. Currently the following things are ready:
>>
>> * Hosting of GHC's repositories and those of its mirrors have been
>>prepared.
>>
>> * Continuous integration has been configured for GHC.
Hey All,
I’ve been doing a decent amount of thinking about the GitLab migration and
realised that I’d not seen any discussion of what we plan to do with all the
information in the Trac Wiki. If there has been some and I’ve missed it I
apologise.
In essence, I’m wondering what the current plan
The original announcement said wiki migration still has a few hitches to be
ironed out, but is generally looking good.
On Fri, Dec 28, 2018 at 1:04 PM Ara Adkins wrote:
> Hey All,
>
> I’ve been doing a decent amount of thinking about the GitLab migration and
> realised that I’d
Ara Adkins writes:
> Hey All,
>
> I’ve been doing a decent amount of thinking about the GitLab migration
> and realised that I’d not seen any discussion of what we plan to do
> with all the information in the Trac Wiki. If there has been some and
> I’ve missed it I apologise.
&
;> I’ve been doing a decent amount of thinking about the GitLab migration
>> and realised that I’d not seen any discussion of what we plan to do
>> with all the information in the Trac Wiki. If there has been some and
>> I’ve missed it I apologise.
>>
>> In essence, I’
Hi everyone,
Over the past few weeks we have been hard at work sorting out the
last batch of issues in GHC's Trac-to-GitLab import [1]. At this point I
believe we have sorted out the issues which are necessary to perform the
final migration:
* We are missing only two tickets (#1436 and #2074 whi
After some days off, I returned to my work on GHC. I looked up my
tickets in Gitlab with a search on assignee=RolandSenn [1].
The system returned a list of 8 open tickets.
Two of them are interesting: #14025 and #15336. Once upon a time I
assigned them to me, worked on them, but unfortunately the
TL;DR. Have a look at this [2] test import of GHC's Trac tickets. Tell us
what issues you find.
Hello everyone,
As you likely know, we are currently in the process of consolidating
GHC's infrastructure on GitLab [1]. The last step of this process is to
migrate our tickets and wiki from Tr
Roland Senn writes:
> After some days off, I returned to my work on GHC. I looked up my
> tickets in Gitlab with a search on assignee=RolandSenn [1].
> The system returned a list of 8 open tickets.
> Two of them are interesting: #14025 and #15336. Once upon a time I
> assigned them to me, worke
: Request for comments on dry-run Trac -> GitLab migration
|
| TL;DR. Have a look at this [2] test import of GHC's Trac tickets. Tell us
| what issues you find.
|
|
| Hello everyone,
|
| As you likely know, we are currently in the process of consolidating
| GHC's i
Thanks Ben, looks amazing.
I don't think the trac metadata boxes should always be visible. They
are unobtrusive now and tbh, I don't think I will be opening them up
much when looking at tickets.
Simon, I think if you start the query with a # then it "works". For
example, search for #12088 instead
There is this other issue though which explains that searching in the
issues view for a ticket number does fail.
https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/30974
https://gitlab.staging.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/issues?scope=all&utf8=%E2%9C%93&state=opened&search=%231234
So if you want to search fo
There appears to be some impedance mismatches between GitLab's formatting
and Trac's formatting in certain places. For example, see the bottom of
this issue [1], which has a long, hyperlinked line with the phrase:
Icanproducethe`missinginstance`issuewithouthavingtorecompileGHC,whichiswhyIthinkitm
Simon Peyton Jones via ghc-devs writes:
> Could we arrange that searching for the ticket number succeeds?
> Eg searching for 12088 fails, and 16013.
>
Yes, this is a bug [1]. I will bring it up with David.
Cheers,
- Ben
[1] https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/30974
signature.asc
I find that commits aren't mentioned on the corresponding issues, for example
there's no equivalent of
https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/13497#comment:27
on
https://gitlab.staging.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/issues/13497
I vaguely remember these "commit posts" being discussed before som
Niklas Hambüchen writes:
> I find that commits aren't mentioned on the corresponding issues, for example
> there's no equivalent of
>
> https://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/13497#comment:27
>
> on
>
> https://gitlab.staging.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/issues/13497
>
> I vaguely remember the
On 05/02/2019 4:49 AM, Ben Gamari wrote:> Yes, this is the cause and the import
does handle this; I just (yet
again) forgot to rerun this stage of the import. This should be fixed now.
For me, nothing seems to have changed on
https://gitlab.staging.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/issues/13497
___
> On 5 Feb 2019, at 3:06 am, Ben Gamari wrote:
>
> TL;DR. Have a look at this [2] test import of GHC's Trac tickets. Tell us
> what issues you find.
>
First up, it’s utterly amazing to me that this is importable and with all links
transferred and syntax highlighting and whatnot! so grea
Noted, thanks for reporting.
On Mon, Feb 04, 2019 at 02:05:07PM -0500, Ryan Scott wrote:
> There appears to be some impedance mismatches between GitLab's formatting
> and Trac's formatting in certain places. For example, see the bottom of
> this issue [1], which has a long, hyperlinked line with t
This look great, thanks to everyone involved!
Some feedback:
- When I click to the "Wiki" link on the left it opens "Home" page and I don't
know how to go to the index from there. I think we may want index to be the
home page for the wiki?
- Redirects don't seem to work:
https://gitlab.sta
On Wed, Mar 06, 2019 at 09:32:44AM +0300, Ömer Sinan Ağacan wrote:
> - Redirects don't seem to work:
> https://gitlab.staging.haskell.org/ghc/ghc/wikis/commentary/rts/heap-objects
I believe this is an unfortunate result of the way we migrate wiki
pages. The way that works is that we don't actual
On March 6, 2019 1:32:44 AM EST, "Ömer Sinan Ağacan"
wrote:
>This look great, thanks to everyone involved!
>
>Some feedback:
>
>- When I click to the "Wiki" link on the left it opens "Home" page and
>I don't
>know how to go to the index from there. I think we may want index to be
>the
> home p
The lacking redirect support is unfortunate. In my opinion this is something we
will need to handle going forward as well; a one time solution like adding
nginx redirects doesn't seem like the right approach to me.
I would rather advocate either option 3 or one of the following options:
5. De
Super excited for this! Thank you to everyone whose put in so much hard work to
get it done!
One question: what is happening with the trac tickets mailing list? I imagine
it’ll be going away, but for those of us that use it to keep track of things is
there a recommended alternative?
Best,
_ar
On March 6, 2019 6:11:49 AM EST, Ara Adkins wrote:
>Super excited for this! Thank you to everyone whose put in so much hard
>work to get it done!
>
>One question: what is happening with the trac tickets mailing list? I
>imagine it’ll be going away, but for those of us that use it to keep
>track
Personally I would like to see it continued, but it may not be worth the work
if I’m in a minority here.
A potential stopgap would be to ‘watch’ the GHC project on our gitlab instance,
but I can’t see any way to decide to get emails for notifications rather than
having to check in at GitLab all
I use it to track tickets and I would also like to see it continued.
Sylvain
On 06/03/2019 12:33, Ara Adkins wrote:
Personally I would like to see it continued, but it may not be worth the work
if I’m in a minority here.
A potential stopgap would be to ‘watch’ the GHC project on our gitlab in
On Wed, Mar 06, 2019 at 06:09:35AM -0500, Ben Gamari wrote:
> The lacking redirect support is unfortunate. In my opinion this is something
> we will need to handle going forward as well; a one time solution like adding
> nginx redirects doesn't seem like the right approach to me.
>
> I would ra
I think gitlab can be configured so notifications are sent for new issues
and comments on issues which should achieve the same thing as the mailing
list did?
On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 12:00 PM Sylvain Henry wrote:
> I use it to track tickets and I would also like to see it continued.
>
> Sylvain
That would be perfect if so. I couldn't find a way to do it when I looked
earlier, but I may well have missed something!
On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 12:33, Matthew Pickering
wrote:
> I think gitlab can be configured so notifications are sent for new issues
> and comments on issues which should achieve
For context: there is a total of 22 pages that use the redirect feature.
So it may actually be feasible to just do this manually.
On Wed, Mar 06, 2019 at 01:05:28PM +0100, Tobias Dammers wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 06, 2019 at 06:09:35AM -0500, Ben Gamari wrote:
> > The lacking redirect support is unfor
Ara Adkins writes:
> That would be perfect if so. I couldn't find a way to do it when I looked
> earlier, but I may well have missed something!
>
If you navigate to the GHC project page [1] while logged in you should
find a little bell [2] button to the right of the "GHC" heading. If you
click on
I think that's a reliable replacement for the ghc-tickets mailing list if
it works well. I'll have to see once the cut-over happens!
On Wed, 6 Mar 2019 at 16:44, Ben Gamari wrote:
> Ara Adkins writes:
>
> > That would be perfect if so. I couldn't find a way to do it when I looked
> > earlier, b
Can they be sent from a different email address than the main.
Gitlab+margebot are quite. Ahum, noisy.. and filtering based on message
content has a potential for false positives.
Kind regards,
Tamar
On Wed, Mar 6, 2019, 12:33 Matthew Pickering
wrote:
> I think gitlab can be configured so notif
77 matches
Mail list logo
