[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [RFE] Migration to gitlab
Re: [RFE] Migration to gitlab
Sun, 17 Mar 2019 15:26:00 +0100
On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 3:06 PM Konstantin Kharlamov <address@hidden> wrote:
> В Вс, мар 17, 2019 at 4:49 ПП (PM), Tadeus Prastowo
> <address@hidden> написал:
> > On Sun, Mar 17, 2019 at 2:23 PM Konstantin Kharlamov
> > <address@hidden> wrote:
> >> The automation sounds a bit abstract,
> > The automation of copying and pasting message-id and the like.
> >> but I guess you still can do it
> >> if gitlab have enabled replying/opening of merge requests through
> >> mails.
> > As you wrote in the initial e-mail, e-mails are not the primary means
> > of gitlab model, and so, how far it can be stretched and how long it
> > will keep being supported remain to be seen. Seeing the stretching is
> > rather easy because it can be done now. But, it is impossible to see
> > how long it will keep being supported in the gitlab model.
> Sure this part is just a contemplation, but I think that usage of
> emails was added to gitlab in the first place to keep workflow of
> peoples who got used to mailing lists. In that case I'd expect this to
> be enhanced rather than removed in the future (of course in the end
> this depends on demand or contributions from other peoples. And you are
> a creator of that demand).
I hope it would be the case. The situation, however, is not
e-mail UI is easier than building a plain-text e-mail UI on top of a
ever dropped from the gitlab model owing to its small user base, it
will be more difficult for the small user base to maintain a
of a plain-text e-mail UI, there should be no problem for those users
who prefer the gitlab model.
> >> Also, Linux kernel and git has "patchwork" site that essentially
> >> tracks
> >> open patch-series, versions of patches, comments to them, allows to
> >> download latest series… It is more advanced than just the mailing
> >> list as GNU Emacs has.
> > Yes, as you pointed out in the initial e-mail, a mailing list itself
> > is not enough. That causes the chore of copying and pasting and the
> > like, which can be automated, especially if Emacs is used. The
> > perspective that I support is that of heterogeneity. IMO, the gitlab
> > model is into homogeneity: one uniform system for everything, but that
> > sacrifices flexibility.
> I just don't see how could gitlab workflow interfere with that. If
> anything, it helps automating the chore of copying and pasting, because
> now you can get someone's series by a simple `git fetch remote branch`.
The gitlab workflow model definitely does not interfere. On the
contrary, it adds to the heterogeneity. The point here is about the
proposal to migrate the Emacs model to the gitlab model, which reduces
Re: [RFE] Migration to gitlab, Stefan Monnier, 2019/03/17
Re: [RFE] Migration to gitlab, Alex, 2019/03/17
Re: [RFE] Migration to gitlab, Eli Zaretskii, 2019/03/17
- Re: [RFE] Migration to gitlab, (continued)