On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 11:36:50PM -0700, Rob Lanphier wrote:
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Faidon Liambotis faidon@wikimedia.orgwrote:
My understanding of the process was that we would collect a broad set of arguments/ideas/proposals and people would be later assigned to the task of evaluating them and proposing a viable solution and a migration path (or not, and propose that we stay with Gerrit).
Yes, we're seeking a broad range of proposals. However, "proposals" is the key word. That means looking the requirements, reading the website and matching against those requirements, and stitching together something that at least looks good on paper. I'm not expecting anyone to set up a prototype, but I am asking that, given how long we've been talking about this, that we narrow down our options a bit to the things that we know are worth looking at rather than (still, a year later) having the "have you looked at this?" discussion again.
I think GitLab looks promising but I'm unable to judge it against all of our requirements just from the online demo and without spending some amount of time on it. I just put some pros and cons as I see them to the Wiki page and hope it can be considered.
Regards, Faidon