[tor-project] Follow up Gitlab next steps (Re: update on ticket system discussion)

Mon Sep 9 18:13:38 UTC 2019

I'd like to chime in to say that going with self-hosted gitlab does not
mean that Tor Project must be entirely cutoff from GitHub.  With mirrors
of repos on GitHub, a lot of the integrations will still work, albeit
not all.

* it is possible to accept and close pull requests if the commits are
unchanged and merged via merge commit

* it is possible to links issues and pull requests in commit messages,
using the full URL, e.g. https://github.com/foo/bar/issues/123 and
GitHub will do all the normal things with it

* Travis, Circle, etc. can still run on GitHub pull requests when it is
just a mirror

Guardian Project and F-Droid have different variants of GitLab+GitHub
integration.

.hc

Gaba:
> 
> 
> El 9/7/19 a las 3:28 PM, Damian Johnson escribió:
>> Hi Gaba, would you mind adding a section that discusses 'Gitlab vs
>> Github'? I realize some folks feel self-hosting is a must, but I value
>> other equities more (like prevalence within the wider open source
>> community and migration redirects).
> 
> Hi!
> 
> I added a section to compare with other platforms like Github. Do you
> mind look at it and fill in what you think is comparable?
> 
> 
>>
>> Ooni chose GitHub [1] and the Network Team has partially migrated in
>> that direction as well [2]. I'd like to give Gitlab a fair shake, but
>> I'm not spotting where within the planning doc we persuasively pitch
>> for Gitlab over its alternatives (and by extension why my subprojects
>> shouldn't follow Ooni and the Network Team's lead as trac is
>> decommissioned).
>>
>> Thanks! -Damian
>>
>> [1] https://ooni.torproject.org/get-involved/
>> [2] https://github.com/torproject
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 1:52 PM Gaba <gaba at torproject.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>>
>>> With Pili we have been working on this document to compare features
>>> between trac and gitlab as well as proposal for a structure and
>>> workflows. Please take a look and send
>>> comments/feedback/edits/adds/questions.
>>>
>>> https://nc.riseup.net/s/SnQy3yMJewRBwA7
>>>
>>> It seems that the next step will be to get together between everybody
>>> interested in this transition (or in not doing it) and discuss this plan
>>> as well as how to move forward.
>>>
>>> We are going to meet on
>>>
>>> September 17th, at 18UTC in #tor-meeting
>>>
>>> Please, send me, pili or to the mailing list any comment if you can not
>>> make it to the meeting.
>>>
>>> cheers,
>>> gaba
>>>
>>>
>>> El 7/29/19 a las 8:07 AM, Gaba escribió:
>>>> Hi!
>>>>
>>>> There has been some discussion in the 'corridors' of Tor and in the last
>>>> meeting face to face during the session on 'internal tooling' and
>>>> specifically about tickets system. I'm sending this mail to try to
>>>> summarize what the discussion has been until now, make it transparent
>>>> and try to get an agreement on how to move forward.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Problem:
>>>> - Trac software is not being mantained (from our perspective of users of
>>>> Trac this is a bomb getting ready to explode) [0]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Solution
>>>> - Move out into a better (possible feature parity with what we use now
>>>> AND integration between project management tool and tickets) and
>>>> mantained ticketing system.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Discussion until now
>>>> - A few years ago there was a survey [1] on which features people would
>>>> like to see in a new ticketing system.
>>>> - There is a ticket [2] that has a discussion on features needed and a
>>>> document [3] that brainstorm features between trac and gitlab.
>>>> - The last meeting in Stockholm there has been several discussions on
>>>> what is needed. [4]
>>>> - In 2017 Hiro and the network team experimented with the oniongit.eu
>>>> Gitlab instance.
>>>> - In 2019, a test instance was setup, called "dip.torproject.org"[5],
>>>> that a few projects are using right now to test its use.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> We are mostly considering Gitlab (until now) because:
>>>> 1. We can host it ourselves and not have other company control the data.
>>>> 2. It is open source [6].
>>>> 3. It is mantained [7].
>>>> 4. It supports the project management tool that we are interested in.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Before moving forward we need:
>>>> 1. Consensus or a clear compromise on what to move into.
>>>> 2. A plan on how the migration to a new ticketing system will happen. I
>>>> started drafting it here (thinking that Gitlab would be the new one)
>>>> [8]. This plan is still a work in progress and we will continue doing it
>>>> when we all agree on which system to move into.
>>>>
>>>> cheers,
>>>> gaba
>>>>
>>>> [0] https://trac.edgewall.org/roadmap
>>>> [1]
>>>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1V4Faq2y9vv8XTp-OADl4YRMTiRB0G9DHvj23NRpwzcc/edit#gid=0
>>>> [2] https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/30857
>>>> [3] https://nc.riseup.net/s/TYX37BDT4eQfTiW
>>>> [4]
>>>> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/org/meetings/2019Stockholm/Notes/InternalTooling
>>>> [5] https://dip.torproject.org
>>>> [6] https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org
>>>> [7] https://gitlab.com/groups/gitlab-org/-/roadmap?layout=MONTHS
>>>> [8] https://nc.riseup.net/s/SnQy3yMJewRBwA7
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Project Manager: Network, Anti-Censorship and Metrics teams
>>> gaba at torproject.org
>>> she/her are my pronouns
>>> GPG Fingerprint EE3F DF5C AD91 643C 21BE  8370 180D B06C 59CA BD19
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> tor-project mailing list
>>> tor-project at lists.torproject.org
>>> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-project
>>
> 

-- 
PGP fingerprint: EE66 20C7 136B 0D2C 456C  0A4D E9E2 8DEA 00AA 5556
https://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0xE9E28DEA00AA5556