On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 12:55 AM, Waldir Pimenta <waldir(a)email.com> wrote:
On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 8:39 PM, Ryan Lane
<rlane32(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 12:15 PM, Yuri Astrakhan
<yuriastrakhan(a)gmail.com
wrote:
Should we re-start the "lets migrate to
github" discussion?
No.
To be fair, though I understand the arguments against using github (though
accepting pull requests from it is a must!), I always had the impression
that other options weren't given enough attention during that discussion.
Particularly GitLab looked very usable, could be used for self-hosting,
etc., and never even got much content in the "case against" section (only
two items, both currently marked as "no longer true"). I am not entirely
sure why it was discarded so promptly in favor of the admittedly powerful,
but clearly problematic/controversial Gerrit. Are there strong reasons do
dismiss it that weren't stated in that page?
Let's please not start the giant flamewar of solutions again. We went
through a fairly long and fairly difficult process just to continue using
Gerrit. If you feel strongly about this, I'll create a project in Labs, and
you can prove that it's worth switching to. Remember to use the evaluation
process we already went through <
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Git/Gerrit_evaluation#Criteria_by_which_to_ju…
and also consider there's probably a giant list of things that we've added
into Gerrit since then.
Remember that if something uses about 100 ruby gems that ops will want to
skin you alive, even if it's a superior solution.
- Ryan