[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [GNUnet-developers] Discussion, and Help Wanted: Moving to Gitlab fo

From: Florian Dold
Subject: Re: [GNUnet-developers] Discussion, and Help Wanted: Moving to Gitlab for Git, CI, and Issues
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 09:37:22 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.5.3

On 4/10/19 1:10 AM, Raphael Arias wrote:
> I don't see why the database of a read-only legacy system would need to
> be regularly backed up. If it remains online purely as an archive
> (possibly with a note to go see the gitlab issue tracker) history is
> preserved while not forcing anyone to do regular backups. Am I missing
> something? If Mantis cannot be run as readonly, maybe an archived
> version of it [0]?

We're moving servers right now, so we do need to back up and restore the
database.  In case of some hardware failure or accidental deletion, we
don't want to lose the archive.

I'm really confused by the assertion that it's so difficult to migrate
Mantis to GitLab.  It might take 1-2 days of work, but in the end it's
just migrating from one SQL schema to the other (and in Mantis' case,
converting structured data into text).

Admittedly Mantis' schema isn't pretty
(, but
I don't see any fundamental difficulties here at all.

> I would like to add my voice to Martin's regarding usage of gitlab.

I agree with almost everything you're saying.  As I've said before, pull
requests and code review are great, but overkill for smaller/trivial
commits in very small teams.

I've also worked in a team before where everything was based on code
reviews, even trivial one character changes.  It was a pleasure!  But
the team was rather large, and the tooling had a whole org with multiple
teams behind it to make sure it's a good experience.  GitLab of course
helps compensate for the latter.

> I have a minor doubt regarding wording: is everyone aware that there are
> *pull requests* and *merge requests* in gitlab?

They're exactly the same [1], at least according to GitLab ;-)

- Florian

[1] -- "Tools such as
GitHub and Bitbucket choose the name pull request since the first manual
action would be to pull the feature branch. Tools such as GitLab and
Gitorious choose the name merge request since that is the final action
that is requested of the assignee. In this article we'll refer to them
as merge requests."

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]