Re: State of kdesvn?

Am 21.01.2015 um 23:14 schrieb Albert Astals Cid: El Dimarts, 20 de gener de 2015, a les 20:14:39, Christian Ehrlicher va escriure: Hello, I recently tried to fix some bugs in kdesvn but got stuck because there is nobody who can review my patches. Rajko Albrecht as the original maintainer stopp

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 3:03 PM, Jan Kundrát wrote: > On Wednesday, 21 January 2015 23:57:07 CEST, Ben Cooksley wrote: >> >> Using either >> http://www.guywarner.com/2014/06/part-2-integrating-phabricator-and.html >> or http://www.dctrwatson.com/2013/01/jenkins-and-phabricator/ or a >> variation t

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

On Wednesday, 21 January 2015 23:57:07 CEST, Ben Cooksley wrote: Using either http://www.guywarner.com/2014/06/part-2-integrating-phabricator-and.html or http://www.dctrwatson.com/2013/01/jenkins-and-phabricator/ or a variation thereof. That is quite some custom code that one has to maintain,

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

On Wednesday, 21 January 2015 23:12:33 CEST, Thomas Lübking wrote: The bug cooked up for asking google about gerrit and scratch repos. The problem is that pushing into any branch would close a review - I can only assume it was linked in the mail thread I found because a similar issue would affe

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 11:39 AM, Thomas Lübking wrote: > On Mittwoch, 21. Januar 2015 22:47:20 CEST, Ben Cooksley wrote: > >>> - CI integration >> >> >> We've addressed that. It can be done with little fuss. > > Do you have any hard data on the "little fuss"? > > I googled for CI and saw quite so

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

On Mittwoch, 21. Januar 2015 22:47:20 CEST, Ben Cooksley wrote: - CI integration We've addressed that. It can be done with little fuss. Do you have any hard data on the "little fuss"? I googled for CI and saw quite some "we need such" comments over the last two years and also some homebrew

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 10:39 AM, Jan Kundrát wrote: > On Wednesday, 21 January 2015 20:07:21 CEST, Ben Cooksley wrote: >>> >>> 1) A detailed list of the issues which a competing proposal would have to >>> address. Some glimpse of this is in the last paragraph, but that's just a >>> very high-leve

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

On Wednesday, 21 January 2015 20:07:21 CEST, Ben Cooksley wrote: 1) A detailed list of the issues which a competing proposal would have to address. Some glimpse of this is in the last paragraph, but that's just a very high-level description. Could you please provide a list of functionality that h

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 10:48 AM, Thomas Lübking wrote: > On Mittwoch, 21. Januar 2015 20:41:18 CEST, Ben Cooksley wrote: > >>> - Do we have access to Qt's (ie. KDE's major upstream) decision process >>> (reasoning) towards gerrit? >> >> >> Our prior requests to be informed when new Qt repositorie

Re: State of kdesvn?

El Dimarts, 20 de gener de 2015, a les 20:14:39, Christian Ehrlicher va escriure: > Hello, > > I recently tried to fix some bugs in kdesvn but got stuck because there > is nobody who can review my patches. Rajko Albrecht as the original > maintainer stopped the development of kdesvn sometime in 2

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 8:05 AM, Jan Kundrát wrote: >> Please read Bens article again. We do this currently and its not working. >> This is what needs to be replaced. Phabricator seems to support this, or so >> they say, **and** is does what Gerrit does. So why not use that and have >> everything

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 3:54 AM, Milian Wolff wrote: > On Wednesday 21 January 2015 11:44:00 Jan Kundrát wrote: >> Hi Ben, >> thanks for your proposal. A couple of points which I'm missing from the >> text, and a few further questions as well: >> >> 1) A detailed list of the issues which a competi

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 5:53 AM, Jan Kundrát wrote: > On Wednesday, 21 January 2015 15:54:52 CEST, Milian Wolff wrote: >>> >>> 6) The discussion focuses in highlighting Phabricator's benefits, which >>> is >>> understandable from your point of view. However, much of the same things >>> can be said

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

When the test system is in place I would like to start my Jenkins integration. So let me know! Thanks Scarlett

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

On Mittwoch, 21. Januar 2015 20:55:54 CEST, Jan Kundrát wrote: The bug you linked to is about something else than scratch repos as far as I see. The bug cooked up for asking google about gerrit and scratch repos. The problem is that pushing into any branch would close a review - I can only ass

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

On Mittwoch, 21. Januar 2015 20:41:18 CEST, Ben Cooksley wrote: - Do we have access to Qt's (ie. KDE's major upstream) decision process (reasoning) towards gerrit? Our prior requests to be informed when new Qt repositories are setup Sorry, I was probably ambiguous here. What I meant is: "Do w

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

On 01/21/2015 10:18 PM, Ivan Čukić wrote: Hi, I'm volunteering KActivities for the test. Konversation, too. Cheerio, Ivan Cheers, Eike

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

On Wednesday, 21 January 2015 16:28:20 CEST, Thomas Lübking wrote: - The major concern about gerrit seems about scratch repos and I think I found a quite old bug/request on this which might cross "trivial" approaches w/ scripts? [1] Otoh, it seems Phabricator doesn't support scratch repos righ

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

Please read Bens article again. We do this currently and its not working. This is what needs to be replaced. Phabricator seems to support this, or so they say, **and** is does what Gerrit does. So why not use that and have everything integrated? It's not as simple as picking a WWW git browser,

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

On Wednesday, 21 January 2015 15:54:52 CEST, Milian Wolff wrote: 6) The discussion focuses in highlighting Phabricator's benefits, which is understandable from your point of view. However, much of the same things can be said about Gerrit as well, especially its backing by a well-known player, ado

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

On Wednesday 21 January 2015 11:44:00 Jan Kundrát wrote: > Hi Ben, > thanks for your proposal. A couple of points which I'm missing from the > text, and a few further questions as well: > > 1) A detailed list of the issues which a competing proposal would have to > address. Some glimpse of this is

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

On 01/21/2015 05:12 AM, Ben Cooksley wrote: Hi all, As promised in the earlier thread, i'd like to present the sysadmin report on the state of the infrastructure surrounding our code. As someone on the original git infra team, I'm impressed - thanks for your hard work. Cheers, Ben Cooksl

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

Hi, I'm volunteering KActivities for the test. Cheerio, Ivan

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

On Wednesday 21 January 2015 17:53:51 Jan Kundrát wrote: > On Wednesday, 21 January 2015 15:54:52 CEST, Milian Wolff wrote: > >> 9) I do not know what effort for integration with KDE Indentity you're > >> referring to. It's a simple LDAP server, and the entire "integration" was > >> trivial. It'

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 4:28 AM, Thomas Lübking wrote: > Some open questions: > > - Do we have access to Qt's (ie. KDE's major upstream) decision process > (reasoning) towards gerrit? Our prior requests to be informed when new Qt repositories are setup were ignored, despite being made on more the

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 3:33 AM, Milian Wolff wrote: > On Wednesday 21 January 2015 17:12:07 Ben Cooksley wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> As promised in the earlier thread, i'd like to present the sysadmin >> report on the state of the infrastructure surrounding our code. >> >> It contains a detailed summ

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 11:44 PM, Jan Kundrát wrote: > Hi Ben, Hi Jan, > thanks for your proposal. A couple of points which I'm missing from the > text, and a few further questions as well: Certainly. > > 1) A detailed list of the issues which a competing proposal would have to > address. Some

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 12:07 AM, Martin Klapetek wrote: > On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 5:12 AM, Ben Cooksley wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> As promised in the earlier thread, i'd like to present the sysadmin >> report on the state of the infrastructure surrounding our code. >> >> It contains a detailed s

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

On Wednesday 21 January 2015 17:12:07 Ben Cooksley wrote: > Hi all, > > As promised in the earlier thread, i'd like to present the sysadmin > report on the state of the infrastructure surrounding our code. > > It contains a detailed summary of what is broken with our existing > systems, why chang

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

Some open questions: - Do we have access to Qt's (ie. KDE's major upstream) decision process (reasoning) towards gerrit? - The major concern about gerrit seems about scratch repos and I think I found a quite old bug/request on this which might cross "trivial" approaches w/ scripts? [1] Otoh,

Re: State of kdesvn?

Christian Ehrlicher wrote: > I recently tried to fix some bugs in kdesvn but got stuck because there > is nobody who can review my patches. Rajko Albrecht as the original > maintainer stopped the development of kdesvn sometime in 2013 and the > other two project members (David Faure and Christophe

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

Hello, On Wednesday 21 January 2015 17:12:07 Ben Cooksley wrote: > As promised in the earlier thread, i'd like to present the sysadmin > report on the state of the infrastructure surrounding our code. > > It contains a detailed summary of what is broken with our existing > systems, why change is

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

Thanks Ben for the right proposal. During the process when the original thread becomes a hell of bickering people defending his point instead of a concise approach, i almost loose the faith on results. I personally tested several of the tools on the last job, where i managed internally the builds

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 5:12 AM, Ben Cooksley wrote: > Hi all, > > As promised in the earlier thread, i'd like to present the sysadmin > report on the state of the infrastructure surrounding our code. > > It contains a detailed summary of what is broken with our existing > systems, why change is

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

Hi Ben, thanks for your proposal. A couple of points which I'm missing from the text, and a few further questions as well: 1) A detailed list of the issues which a competing proposal would have to address. Some glimpse of this is in the last paragraph, but that's just a very high-level descri

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 7:50 PM, Luca Beltrame wrote: > Ben Cooksley wrote: > > Hello Ben, Hi Luca, > >> As promised in the earlier thread, i'd like to present the sysadmin >> report on the state of the infrastructure surrounding our code. > > I know I'm much less into coding than other people h

Re: Review Request 121831: libksysguard: process.h: encapsulate private fields

> On Jan. 19, 2015, 6:24 nachm., Aleix Pol Gonzalez wrote: > > processcore/process.h, line 103 > > > > > > Maybe you want to prefix the attribute variables with m_ then? > > Gregor Mi wrote: > Thanks for the

Re: Review Request 121831: libksysguard: process.h: encapsulate private fields

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121831/#review74463 --- I think it's a good idea to hide the impl behind a d-pointer.

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

Hi, I am all for the proposal -- though I would like to use Phabricator for issue tracking as well, actually. I would also like to propose Calligra/Krita as one of the test projects. On Wednesday 21 January 2015 Jan 17:12:07 Ben Cooksley wrote: > Hi all, > > As promised in the earlier thread,

Re: Sysadmin report on the modernization of our infrastructure

Ben Cooksley wrote: Hello Ben, > As promised in the earlier thread, i'd like to present the sysadmin > report on the state of the infrastructure surrounding our code. I know I'm much less into coding than other people here (which are probably far more knowledgeable), but in general the proposal