Getting to git

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
35 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Getting to git

Bryce Harrington-3
    "The time has come," the Walrus said,
    "To talk of many things:
    Of shoes — and ships — and sealing-wax—
    Of cabbages — and kings —
    And why the sea is boiling hot—

    And whether Inkscape should switch to gitlab or github or entirely other things."

At Hackfest 2015 we broached the topic of moving to git, and while
recognizing it as probably inevitable, decided to take care of a few
other things like switching to cmake first, and getting a release out
the door, and getting going with Gtk3 and C++-11.

That release is out the door, cmake is done, Gtk3 is landed in trunk,
C++-11 work is under way, and so I think it's time we start on tackling
git.

When we last visited this discussion, there was a consensus that yes we
should move to git, and that rather than self-hosting a plain git repo
(ala freedesktop), we would be better to look at an integrated platform
like github or gitlab.  But there was not a consensus as to which of
those two to pick.

So the task at hand is to discuss and deliberate the two and decide
which should be our focus.  Both have interesting pros and cons, and I
don't think the decision is clear cut.

Where should we go?

In github's favor is that it holds the greater mindshare.  Where we to
go with it we'd potentially tap into a larger community of developers,
which potentially could translate into a greater level of new
participation in the project.  github also seems like it's received a
greater amount of polish and has some feature advantages (github's CI
was seen as a huge pro last time we looked).

gitlab is an up-and-comer and is actively acquiring analogous features
to github.  A big pro for us is that gitlab is FOSS whereas gitlab is
free but proprietary.  With gitlab we'd also hold the option of
self-hosting, which might not matter or might be a huge advantage, it's
hard to say.

Both services provide broadly similar functionality and user
experiences.  The differences between them will be small compared with
the differences we'll be facing moving from bzr+launchpad.  Also,
migration from github to gitlab or vice versa if we change our minds
doesn't look like it'd be all that difficult.

Those may be the best two options but they're not the only ones we
have.  There's other services, and of course git can be used serverside
all on its own purely as commandline, or with cgit to provide a minimal
web service.


-- faqs -------------------------------------------------------------------

Why the need to move from bzr?  One of the reasons why we switched from
svn to bzr rather than git was because it was easier to learn; these
days so many people know git and don't know bzr (and probably don't care
to learn bzr) that this isn't quite such an advantage any more.  git is
also more actively maintained than bzr, and has a far bigger ecosystem
of tutorials, tools and services.  We also liked the integration between
bzr and the LP bug tracker -- we'll lose this, although github/gitlab
provide different integration opportunities that might compensate a bit.

What services would we move?  What we've discussed in the past is to
keep the migration limited to VCS, branch management, and code review.
The issue tracking in github/gitlab is quite different from what we've
grown accustomed to in LP so changing that might be too much disruption.
bzr->git is the main thing we're concerned with; transition of other
services can be handled on a case by case basis.

How would we undertake the transition?  suv made a good point today that
migration of smaller codebases first can be helpful so that the learning
curve can be digested in pieces rather than in one big go.  So perhaps
we should begin by moving some of our more peripheral bzr repos, then
maybe things like the website and then 2geom, and then do inkscape
last.

What about people who don't yet know git?  I suspect a lot of us either
already know git or have been working on learning it, that this isn't an
issue.  However, this transition is important enough I'd be willing to
propose to the board that we fund book purchases and/or other forms of
training for members that might need it.

When would the transition be done?  We've done some initial
experimentation already.  I would propose as soon as we have a strong
consensus for github or gitlab that we proceed with moving the board's
repository, inkscape-docs, and any other small / lesser-used
repositories still relevant to Inkscape.  Then second in perhaps a few
months migrate inkscape-web and 2geom over.  Once those are complete
then migrate the inkscape repository itself over, with the goal of
having the migration done.  I'd like to see the transition completed
prior to when we start getting heavily into the 0.93 release.

Let me know your thoughts, and help us drive towards a consensus for
github or gitlab.

Thanks,
Bryce


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Getting to git

objarni
Since issue tracking stays on launchpad, I don't think the gitlab or github choice matters much as moving the repositories from one to the other without any issue tracking to worry about is a much smaller thing both in mindshare and technically.

I concur with suv that moving smaller repos first is a good idea for smoother learning curves. What about moving one small repo to github and another to gitlab so more eyeballs get to see both? Moving the small repos between the two is even simpler of course, so it could be a way to get a little more Pro/Con research done.

On a general regard I think this has good value for the Inkscape project - gaining a lot more developer traction - as bzr is, even though it hurts me to say as it was my first experience with dvcs systems, quite arcane these days. :(

On 6 Jan 2017 09:53, "Bryce Harrington" <[hidden email]> wrote:
    "The time has come," the Walrus said,
    "To talk of many things:
    Of shoes — and ships — and sealing-wax—
    Of cabbages — and kings —
    And why the sea is boiling hot—

    And whether Inkscape should switch to gitlab or github or entirely other things."

At Hackfest 2015 we broached the topic of moving to git, and while
recognizing it as probably inevitable, decided to take care of a few
other things like switching to cmake first, and getting a release out
the door, and getting going with Gtk3 and C++-11.

That release is out the door, cmake is done, Gtk3 is landed in trunk,
C++-11 work is under way, and so I think it's time we start on tackling
git.

When we last visited this discussion, there was a consensus that yes we
should move to git, and that rather than self-hosting a plain git repo
(ala freedesktop), we would be better to look at an integrated platform
like github or gitlab.  But there was not a consensus as to which of
those two to pick.

So the task at hand is to discuss and deliberate the two and decide
which should be our focus.  Both have interesting pros and cons, and I
don't think the decision is clear cut.

Where should we go?

In github's favor is that it holds the greater mindshare.  Where we to
go with it we'd potentially tap into a larger community of developers,
which potentially could translate into a greater level of new
participation in the project.  github also seems like it's received a
greater amount of polish and has some feature advantages (github's CI
was seen as a huge pro last time we looked).

gitlab is an up-and-comer and is actively acquiring analogous features
to github.  A big pro for us is that gitlab is FOSS whereas gitlab is
free but proprietary.  With gitlab we'd also hold the option of
self-hosting, which might not matter or might be a huge advantage, it's
hard to say.

Both services provide broadly similar functionality and user
experiences.  The differences between them will be small compared with
the differences we'll be facing moving from bzr+launchpad.  Also,
migration from github to gitlab or vice versa if we change our minds
doesn't look like it'd be all that difficult.

Those may be the best two options but they're not the only ones we
have.  There's other services, and of course git can be used serverside
all on its own purely as commandline, or with cgit to provide a minimal
web service.


-- faqs -------------------------------------------------------------------

Why the need to move from bzr?  One of the reasons why we switched from
svn to bzr rather than git was because it was easier to learn; these
days so many people know git and don't know bzr (and probably don't care
to learn bzr) that this isn't quite such an advantage any more.  git is
also more actively maintained than bzr, and has a far bigger ecosystem
of tutorials, tools and services.  We also liked the integration between
bzr and the LP bug tracker -- we'll lose this, although github/gitlab
provide different integration opportunities that might compensate a bit.

What services would we move?  What we've discussed in the past is to
keep the migration limited to VCS, branch management, and code review.
The issue tracking in github/gitlab is quite different from what we've
grown accustomed to in LP so changing that might be too much disruption.
bzr->git is the main thing we're concerned with; transition of other
services can be handled on a case by case basis.

How would we undertake the transition?  suv made a good point today that
migration of smaller codebases first can be helpful so that the learning
curve can be digested in pieces rather than in one big go.  So perhaps
we should begin by moving some of our more peripheral bzr repos, then
maybe things like the website and then 2geom, and then do inkscape
last.

What about people who don't yet know git?  I suspect a lot of us either
already know git or have been working on learning it, that this isn't an
issue.  However, this transition is important enough I'd be willing to
propose to the board that we fund book purchases and/or other forms of
training for members that might need it.

When would the transition be done?  We've done some initial
experimentation already.  I would propose as soon as we have a strong
consensus for github or gitlab that we proceed with moving the board's
repository, inkscape-docs, and any other small / lesser-used
repositories still relevant to Inkscape.  Then second in perhaps a few
months migrate inkscape-web and 2geom over.  Once those are complete
then migrate the inkscape repository itself over, with the goal of
having the migration done.  I'd like to see the transition completed
prior to when we start getting heavily into the 0.93 release.

Let me know your thoughts, and help us drive towards a consensus for
github or gitlab.

Thanks,
Bryce


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Getting to git

Tavmjong Bah
In reply to this post by Bryce Harrington-3

A couple comments:

1. lib2geom already uses git
2. The biggest problem with git is the lack of human readable
sequential revision numbering... but it seems this can be worked
around. See, for example:

  https://cd34.com/blog/programming/using-git-to-generate-an-automatic-
version-number/


On Fri, 2017-01-06 at 00:51 -0800, Bryce Harrington wrote:

>     "The time has come," the Walrus said,
>     "To talk of many things:
>     Of shoes — and ships — and sealing-wax—
>     Of cabbages — and kings —
>     And why the sea is boiling hot—
>
>     And whether Inkscape should switch to gitlab or github or
> entirely other things."
>
> At Hackfest 2015 we broached the topic of moving to git, and while
> recognizing it as probably inevitable, decided to take care of a few
> other things like switching to cmake first, and getting a release out
> the door, and getting going with Gtk3 and C++-11.
>
> That release is out the door, cmake is done, Gtk3 is landed in trunk,
> C++-11 work is under way, and so I think it's time we start on
> tackling
> git.
>
> When we last visited this discussion, there was a consensus that yes
> we
> should move to git, and that rather than self-hosting a plain git
> repo
> (ala freedesktop), we would be better to look at an integrated
> platform
> like github or gitlab.  But there was not a consensus as to which of
> those two to pick.
>
> So the task at hand is to discuss and deliberate the two and decide
> which should be our focus.  Both have interesting pros and cons, and
> I
> don't think the decision is clear cut.
>
> Where should we go?
>
> In github's favor is that it holds the greater mindshare.  Where we
> to
> go with it we'd potentially tap into a larger community of
> developers,
> which potentially could translate into a greater level of new
> participation in the project.  github also seems like it's received a
> greater amount of polish and has some feature advantages (github's CI
> was seen as a huge pro last time we looked).
>
> gitlab is an up-and-comer and is actively acquiring analogous
> features
> to github.  A big pro for us is that gitlab is FOSS whereas gitlab is
> free but proprietary.  With gitlab we'd also hold the option of
> self-hosting, which might not matter or might be a huge advantage,
> it's
> hard to say.
>
> Both services provide broadly similar functionality and user
> experiences.  The differences between them will be small compared
> with
> the differences we'll be facing moving from bzr+launchpad.  Also,
> migration from github to gitlab or vice versa if we change our minds
> doesn't look like it'd be all that difficult.
>
> Those may be the best two options but they're not the only ones we
> have.  There's other services, and of course git can be used
> serverside
> all on its own purely as commandline, or with cgit to provide a
> minimal
> web service.
>
>
> -- faqs -----------------------------------------------------------
> --------
>
> Why the need to move from bzr?  One of the reasons why we switched
> from
> svn to bzr rather than git was because it was easier to learn; these
> days so many people know git and don't know bzr (and probably don't
> care
> to learn bzr) that this isn't quite such an advantage any more.  git
> is
> also more actively maintained than bzr, and has a far bigger
> ecosystem
> of tutorials, tools and services.  We also liked the integration
> between
> bzr and the LP bug tracker -- we'll lose this, although github/gitlab
> provide different integration opportunities that might compensate a
> bit.
>
> What services would we move?  What we've discussed in the past is to
> keep the migration limited to VCS, branch management, and code
> review.
> The issue tracking in github/gitlab is quite different from what
> we've
> grown accustomed to in LP so changing that might be too much
> disruption.
> bzr->git is the main thing we're concerned with; transition of other
> services can be handled on a case by case basis.
>
> How would we undertake the transition?  suv made a good point today
> that
> migration of smaller codebases first can be helpful so that the
> learning
> curve can be digested in pieces rather than in one big go.  So
> perhaps
> we should begin by moving some of our more peripheral bzr repos, then
> maybe things like the website and then 2geom, and then do inkscape
> last.
>
> What about people who don't yet know git?  I suspect a lot of us
> either
> already know git or have been working on learning it, that this isn't
> an
> issue.  However, this transition is important enough I'd be willing
> to
> propose to the board that we fund book purchases and/or other forms
> of
> training for members that might need it.
>
> When would the transition be done?  We've done some initial
> experimentation already.  I would propose as soon as we have a strong
> consensus for github or gitlab that we proceed with moving the
> board's
> repository, inkscape-docs, and any other small / lesser-used
> repositories still relevant to Inkscape.  Then second in perhaps a
> few
> months migrate inkscape-web and 2geom over.  Once those are complete
> then migrate the inkscape repository itself over, with the goal of
> having the migration done.  I'd like to see the transition completed
> prior to when we start getting heavily into the 0.93 release.
>
> Let me know your thoughts, and help us drive towards a consensus for
> github or gitlab.
>
> Thanks,
> Bryce
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> -----------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most 
> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Inkscape-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Getting to git

Martin Owens-2
In reply to this post by Bryce Harrington-3
Thanks for initialising this one Bryce,

> In github's favor is that it holds the greater mindshare.  Where we
> to
> go with it we'd potentially tap into a larger community of
> developers,
> which potentially could translate into a greater level of new
> participation in the project.  github also seems like it's received a
> greater amount of polish and has some feature advantages (github's CI
> was seen as a huge pro last time we looked).
>
> gitlab is an up-and-comer and is actively acquiring analogous
> features
> to github.  A big pro for us is that gitlab is FOSS whereas github is
> free but proprietary.  With gitlab we'd also hold the option of
> self-hosting, which might not matter or might be a huge advantage,
> it's
> hard to say.

One advantage to GitLab is a contact on the inside. If we need to, we
can ask questions directly.

I've worked with Github, Gitlab, and a few others in my contracting
work, as well as private Gitorious and self-hosted gitlab. I'm
currently in favour of GitLab as the most in keeping with our Free
Software ideals, as capable as GitHub and the possibilities of lending
a hand with improvements to things like the issues tracker in the
future to make it work better for us.

GitHub is decent, but it's fashionable but with some downsides. At
least they recently fixed their "nothing has a license" bug.

I should add that both GitHub and GitLab have weak project control. I
don't believe there's an advantage to either and misappropriation of
the inkscape brand is highly likely on both. This is probably a
personal bug bear as they both go for the "repository is king" model.

Best Regards, Martin Owens

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Getting to git

Martin Owens-2
In reply to this post by objarni
On Fri, 2017-01-06 at 10:24 +0100, Olof Bjarnason wrote:
> What about moving one small repo to github and another to gitlab so
> more eyeballs get to see both?

I see that metric as a bit biased. We know Github is the monopoly de-
jure, so just by force of numbers it'll discount any other concerns or
benefits in favour of one.

Do we really have a lack of eyeballs? Inkscape is insanely popular
already. What we need is better tools, not just the most popular one.

Martin,

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Getting to git

Ted Gould
In reply to this post by Bryce Harrington-3
On Fri, 2017-01-06 at 00:51 -0800, Bryce Harrington wrote:
>     "The time has come," the Walrus said,
>     "To talk of many things:
>     Of shoes — and ships — and sealing-wax—
>     Of cabbages — and kings —
>     And why the sea is boiling hot—
>
>     And whether Inkscape should switch to gitlab or github or
> entirely other things."

We need a requirement that all e-mail threads are started with poetry
;-)

> In github's favor is that it holds the greater mindshare.  Where we
> to
> go with it we'd potentially tap into a larger community of
> developers,
> which potentially could translate into a greater level of new
> participation in the project.  github also seems like it's received a
> greater amount of polish and has some feature advantages (github's CI
> was seen as a huge pro last time we looked).

I think where this mindshare comes into play is less with drive-by
contributions as much as integrations with other services. There are a
lot of cool tools built that "just work" with Github. Some only support
that as a backend (even though they probably just grab git and work on
it, they just don't have an option in the UI) What I'm not sure about
is whether we'd end up using any of those services anyway.

Since we last discussed it Gitlab's CI has really stepped up the game.
I'd say that if we're just looking at the core services Gitlab wins
there today. Github/Travis becomes a more interesting discussion.

> gitlab is an up-and-comer and is actively acquiring analogous
> features
> to github.  A big pro for us is that gitlab is FOSS whereas gitlab is
> free but proprietary.  With gitlab we'd also hold the option of
> self-hosting, which might not matter or might be a huge advantage,
> it's
> hard to say.

And they also seem to be pushing for adoption into the FOSS community.
They're showing up at our conferences and stuff like that. Easy to get
stickers ;-)

> We also liked the integration between
> bzr and the LP bug tracker -- we'll lose this, although github/gitlab
> provide different integration opportunities that might compensate a
> bit.

Since the last time we've discussed it LP's Git features have matured a
lot. I don't think that they're on par with Github/Gitlab yet, but we
should probably put into consideration just moving to Git and sticking
with LP, as it might be a simpler transition.

> How would we undertake the transition?  suv made a good point today
> that
> migration of smaller codebases first can be helpful so that the
> learning
> curve can be digested in pieces rather than in one big go.

+1, go suv!

> Let me know your thoughts, and help us drive towards a consensus for
> github or gitlab.

For me, right now, my feelings are towards Gitlab. I think that we
should stick with a FOSS solution overall and Github doesn't have
enough advantages to override that.

Ted


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Getting to git

Krzysztof Kosiński
In reply to this post by Martin Owens-2
An advantage of GitHub that was not mentioned here is Travis CI, which allows to run unit tests before merging every branch.

GitLab also has a CI solution, but its public runner servers do not support C++ - we would need to self-host that part.

Best regards, Krzysztof

On Jan 6, 2017 01:42, "Martin Owens" <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Fri, 2017-01-06 at 10:24 +0100, Olof Bjarnason wrote:
> What about moving one small repo to github and another to gitlab so
> more eyeballs get to see both?

I see that metric as a bit biased. We know Github is the monopoly de-
jure, so just by force of numbers it'll discount any other concerns or
benefits in favour of one.

Do we really have a lack of eyeballs? Inkscape is insanely popular
already. What we need is better tools, not just the most popular one.

Martin,

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Getting to git

Josh Andler
I will say as much as I want a FLOSS solution, it's not a religious
issue for me. I lean towards GitHub because of the larger pool of
developers and Travis CI integration (not something I've used
personally, but heard a lot of positive reports on).

Cheers,
Josh

On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 9:11 AM, Krzysztof Kosiński <[hidden email]> wrote:

> An advantage of GitHub that was not mentioned here is Travis CI, which
> allows to run unit tests before merging every branch.
>
> GitLab also has a CI solution, but its public runner servers do not support
> C++ - we would need to self-host that part.
>
> Best regards, Krzysztof
>
> On Jan 6, 2017 01:42, "Martin Owens" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 2017-01-06 at 10:24 +0100, Olof Bjarnason wrote:
>> > What about moving one small repo to github and another to gitlab so
>> > more eyeballs get to see both?
>>
>> I see that metric as a bit biased. We know Github is the monopoly de-
>> jure, so just by force of numbers it'll discount any other concerns or
>> benefits in favour of one.
>>
>> Do we really have a lack of eyeballs? Inkscape is insanely popular
>> already. What we need is better tools, not just the most popular one.
>>
>> Martin,
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> Inkscape-devel mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Inkscape-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Getting to git

Chris Tooley
In reply to this post by Krzysztof Kosiński
I don't know if this is a concern or perhaps a bonus, but I do know that github encourages a lot of forking and hacking and contributions from coders on the "sideline". This may also produce some interested hackers creating unique changes that might not otherwise have happened - also because primarily it's something they get to put on their github page as "popular repositories" and "contributions" within the last 6 months.  I know there is some software out there I've contributed to that was on github that I might not have contributed had it not been on there, because they make PRs really really easy.

As an aside, I get the warm and fuzzies when I hear "Inkscape is already insanely popular" even though I had nothing to do with it. It's great software, you guys are great. Keep it up!

On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 9:11 AM, Krzysztof Kosiński <[hidden email]> wrote:
An advantage of GitHub that was not mentioned here is Travis CI, which allows to run unit tests before merging every branch.

GitLab also has a CI solution, but its public runner servers do not support C++ - we would need to self-host that part.

Best regards, Krzysztof

On Jan 6, 2017 01:42, "Martin Owens" <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Fri, 2017-01-06 at 10:24 +0100, Olof Bjarnason wrote:
> What about moving one small repo to github and another to gitlab so
> more eyeballs get to see both?

I see that metric as a bit biased. We know Github is the monopoly de-
jure, so just by force of numbers it'll discount any other concerns or
benefits in favour of one.

Do we really have a lack of eyeballs? Inkscape is insanely popular
already. What we need is better tools, not just the most popular one.

Martin,

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Getting to git

Martin Owens-2
In reply to this post by Krzysztof Kosiński

> GitLab also has a CI solution, but its public runner servers do not
> support C++ - we would need to self-host that part.

This might have been in the past, but current GitLab CI has C++, see
this example ironically hosted on GitHub:

https://github.com/olindata/sample-gitlabci-cpp-project

I think we're right to strongly want good CI support and if we have any
trouble, I would lean strongly on our GitLab contact to see what could
be done.

Martin,

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Getting to git

Bryce Harrington-3
In reply to this post by Tavmjong Bah
On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 10:28:35AM +0100, Tavmjong Bah wrote:

>
> A couple comments:
>
> 1. lib2geom already uses git
> 2. The biggest problem with git is the lack of human readable
> sequential revision numbering... but it seems this can be worked
> around. See, for example:
>
>   https://cd34.com/blog/programming/using-git-to-generate-an-automatic-
> version-number/
 
The lack of sequential numbering of commits is indeed a bit annoying.
I've found that in at least some of the cases where I needed that,
actually what I was concerned with was a range of commits, or the
previous N commits, and git does have some syntax to do that.  E.g.:

  git diff HEAD~5..HEAD~2  # diff a range of recent commits

  git show beb97e5f~1      # Show commit prior to beb97e5f

Bryce

> On Fri, 2017-01-06 at 00:51 -0800, Bryce Harrington wrote:
> >     "The time has come," the Walrus said,
> >     "To talk of many things:
> >     Of shoes — and ships — and sealing-wax—
> >     Of cabbages — and kings —
> >     And why the sea is boiling hot—
> >
> >     And whether Inkscape should switch to gitlab or github or
> > entirely other things."
> >
> > At Hackfest 2015 we broached the topic of moving to git, and while
> > recognizing it as probably inevitable, decided to take care of a few
> > other things like switching to cmake first, and getting a release out
> > the door, and getting going with Gtk3 and C++-11.
> >
> > That release is out the door, cmake is done, Gtk3 is landed in trunk,
> > C++-11 work is under way, and so I think it's time we start on
> > tackling
> > git.
> >
> > When we last visited this discussion, there was a consensus that yes
> > we
> > should move to git, and that rather than self-hosting a plain git
> > repo
> > (ala freedesktop), we would be better to look at an integrated
> > platform
> > like github or gitlab.  But there was not a consensus as to which of
> > those two to pick.
> >
> > So the task at hand is to discuss and deliberate the two and decide
> > which should be our focus.  Both have interesting pros and cons, and
> > I
> > don't think the decision is clear cut.
> >
> > Where should we go?
> >
> > In github's favor is that it holds the greater mindshare.  Where we
> > to
> > go with it we'd potentially tap into a larger community of
> > developers,
> > which potentially could translate into a greater level of new
> > participation in the project.  github also seems like it's received a
> > greater amount of polish and has some feature advantages (github's CI
> > was seen as a huge pro last time we looked).
> >
> > gitlab is an up-and-comer and is actively acquiring analogous
> > features
> > to github.  A big pro for us is that gitlab is FOSS whereas gitlab is
> > free but proprietary.  With gitlab we'd also hold the option of
> > self-hosting, which might not matter or might be a huge advantage,
> > it's
> > hard to say.
> >
> > Both services provide broadly similar functionality and user
> > experiences.  The differences between them will be small compared
> > with
> > the differences we'll be facing moving from bzr+launchpad.  Also,
> > migration from github to gitlab or vice versa if we change our minds
> > doesn't look like it'd be all that difficult.
> >
> > Those may be the best two options but they're not the only ones we
> > have.  There's other services, and of course git can be used
> > serverside
> > all on its own purely as commandline, or with cgit to provide a
> > minimal
> > web service.
> >
> >
> > -- faqs -----------------------------------------------------------
> > --------
> >
> > Why the need to move from bzr?  One of the reasons why we switched
> > from
> > svn to bzr rather than git was because it was easier to learn; these
> > days so many people know git and don't know bzr (and probably don't
> > care
> > to learn bzr) that this isn't quite such an advantage any more.  git
> > is
> > also more actively maintained than bzr, and has a far bigger
> > ecosystem
> > of tutorials, tools and services.  We also liked the integration
> > between
> > bzr and the LP bug tracker -- we'll lose this, although github/gitlab
> > provide different integration opportunities that might compensate a
> > bit.
> >
> > What services would we move?  What we've discussed in the past is to
> > keep the migration limited to VCS, branch management, and code
> > review.
> > The issue tracking in github/gitlab is quite different from what
> > we've
> > grown accustomed to in LP so changing that might be too much
> > disruption.
> > bzr->git is the main thing we're concerned with; transition of other
> > services can be handled on a case by case basis.
> >
> > How would we undertake the transition?  suv made a good point today
> > that
> > migration of smaller codebases first can be helpful so that the
> > learning
> > curve can be digested in pieces rather than in one big go.  So
> > perhaps
> > we should begin by moving some of our more peripheral bzr repos, then
> > maybe things like the website and then 2geom, and then do inkscape
> > last.
> >
> > What about people who don't yet know git?  I suspect a lot of us
> > either
> > already know git or have been working on learning it, that this isn't
> > an
> > issue.  However, this transition is important enough I'd be willing
> > to
> > propose to the board that we fund book purchases and/or other forms
> > of
> > training for members that might need it.
> >
> > When would the transition be done?  We've done some initial
> > experimentation already.  I would propose as soon as we have a strong
> > consensus for github or gitlab that we proceed with moving the
> > board's
> > repository, inkscape-docs, and any other small / lesser-used
> > repositories still relevant to Inkscape.  Then second in perhaps a
> > few
> > months migrate inkscape-web and 2geom over.  Once those are complete
> > then migrate the inkscape repository itself over, with the goal of
> > having the migration done.  I'd like to see the transition completed
> > prior to when we start getting heavily into the 0.93 release.
> >
> > Let me know your thoughts, and help us drive towards a consensus for
> > github or gitlab.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Bryce
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------
> > -----------
> > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most 
> > engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> > _______________________________________________
> > Inkscape-devel mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Getting to git

Bryce Harrington-3
In reply to this post by Krzysztof Kosiński
On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 09:11:23AM -0800, Krzysztof Kosiński wrote:
> An advantage of GitHub that was not mentioned here is Travis CI, which
> allows to run unit tests before merging every branch.

Right.  I did actually mention that - I do remember that was a key point
in its favor ("github's CI was seen as a huge pro last time we looked").
But gitlab has improved in this particular area, and also shows that
we're dealing with moving targets, and weight feature-by-feature
comparisons knowing a deficiency today may not exist tomorrow.

Bryce
 

> GitLab also has a CI solution, but its public runner servers do not support
> C++ - we would need to self-host that part.
>
> Best regards, Krzysztof
>
> On Jan 6, 2017 01:42, "Martin Owens" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2017-01-06 at 10:24 +0100, Olof Bjarnason wrote:
> > > What about moving one small repo to github and another to gitlab so
> > > more eyeballs get to see both?
> >
> > I see that metric as a bit biased. We know Github is the monopoly de-
> > jure, so just by force of numbers it'll discount any other concerns or
> > benefits in favour of one.
> >
> > Do we really have a lack of eyeballs? Inkscape is insanely popular
> > already. What we need is better tools, not just the most popular one.
> >
> > Martin,
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > ------------------
> > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> > engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> > _______________________________________________
> > Inkscape-devel mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
> >

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Getting to git

Bryce Harrington-3
In reply to this post by Ted Gould
On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 08:56:50AM -0600, Ted Gould wrote:
> I think where this mindshare comes into play is less with drive-by
> contributions as much as integrations with other services. There are a
> lot of cool tools built that "just work" with Github. Some only support
> that as a backend (even though they probably just grab git and work on
> it, they just don't have an option in the UI) What I'm not sure about
> is whether we'd end up using any of those services anyway.

True, good points.  And yeah, most of the services I actually have in
mind for us just require git, so should work equally well regardless of
what we pick.

I've used both gitlab and github for medium-sized projects, and found
them both to be usable and performant.  Inkscape is larger and more
complex, but so far I haven't seen any reason that either of those
options wouldn't do the basic job as well as the other.

> > We also liked the integration between
> > bzr and the LP bug tracker -- we'll lose this, although github/gitlab
> > provide different integration opportunities that might compensate a
> > bit.
>
> Since the last time we've discussed it LP's Git features have matured a
> lot. I don't think that they're on par with Github/Gitlab yet, but we
> should probably put into consideration just moving to Git and sticking
> with LP, as it might be a simpler transition.

You're right it should be included as an option.  If nothing else it has
familiarity and inertia to change working in its favor.  I'm not sure
how compelling a case can be made for it beyond that though.

A large chunk of our transition pain will be developers adapting to git,
and we'll have that regardless of any of the options.  The other chunk
is the web interface and I suppose there's some advantage with Launchpad
of sticking with the familiar.

However, Launchpad has remained understaffed for years, and
unfortunately it really shows.  The chances of reaching parity with
github/gitlab seem slim to none.  And once their development attention
moves on to the next feature development effort, ongoing maintenance of
the service is going to become an issue, as it already has in so many
other places.

Like gitlab, launchpad is open source.  I've contributed LP code
myself.  I don't know if we're likely to invest development energy here,
but both gitlab and LP seem on the same level here.  gitlab seems to
have a more active development community though.

> > Let me know your thoughts, and help us drive towards a consensus for
> > github or gitlab.
>
> For me, right now, my feelings are towards Gitlab. I think that we
> should stick with a FOSS solution overall and Github doesn't have
> enough advantages to override that.

There was a ticket on our github account with people pushing for github
adoption.  I'll touch base with them to gather their input, but at this
point I agree with you it seems gitlab is looking the better option for
Inkscape.

Bryce

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Getting to git

Bryce Harrington-3
In reply to this post by Bryce Harrington-3
----- Forwarded message from Will Entriken <[hidden email]> -----

Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 22:04:20 -0500
From: Will Entriken <[hidden email]>
To: Bryce Harrington <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] Getting to git]

Bryce,

Thanks for keeping me in the loop.

I am very glad to hear about this update. And I fully expect much more
participation in the project as soon as we open this floodgate. With a
good amount of focus and direction, we should be able to get to 1.0.0
quickly.

Here's my two cents on the GitLab / GitHub choice. GitHub is my
default choice because it is the most popular and it works well
enough. The largest project I contribute to there is
https://github.com/chartjs/Chart.js and GitHub has no pain points in
dealing with that project. I am more than happy to pick
indie/non-popular choices if they are better. And if attracting
developers and casual contributions is the goal then I do not think
GitLab is better.

More thorough discussion:
 * Top 10 projects of all time on GitLab:
https://gitlab.com/explore/projects/starred
 * Top 10 projects this week on GitHub: https://github.com/trending?since=weekly
 * Random projects I started:
https://github.com/fulldecent?language=&page=2&q=&tab=repositories&type=source&utf8=%E2%9C%93

Projects got more exposure (measured in stars) this week on GitHub
than the whole history of GitLab. And my random pet projects (which
are way less notable than Inkscape) would rank displace the #1, #2 and
#6 projects on GitLab. Therefore I think Inkscape would be a big fish
in a small pond there.

Please feel free to copy this to the mailing list.

Thank you,
Will


William Entriken
267-738-4201



On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 2:32 PM, Bryce Harrington
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi fulldecent,
>
> I know you've been very active in maintaining the Inkscape mirror on
> github.  You'll be pleased to hear the project is finally getting around
> to its git migration planning.
>
> We're debating gitlab vs. github as our way forward, and while we're
> still pretty early in discussion currently consensus appears to be
> favoring gitlab.  I'd like to make sure we loop you in (and any others
> you've worked with on the github mirror) to make sure we have plenty of
> input and information before reaching any decisions.
>
> Feel free to either chime in on the mailing list with your thoughts, or
> just reply to me and I'll pass them along.
>
> Thanks,
> Bryce
>
> ----- Forwarded message from Bryce Harrington <[hidden email]> -----
>
> Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 11:21:28 -0800
> From: Bryce Harrington <[hidden email]>
> To: Ted Gould <[hidden email]>
> Cc: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] Getting to git
>
> On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 08:56:50AM -0600, Ted Gould wrote:
>> I think where this mindshare comes into play is less with drive-by
>> contributions as much as integrations with other services. There are a
>> lot of cool tools built that "just work" with Github. Some only support
>> that as a backend (even though they probably just grab git and work on
>> it, they just don't have an option in the UI) What I'm not sure about
>> is whether we'd end up using any of those services anyway.
>
> True, good points.  And yeah, most of the services I actually have in
> mind for us just require git, so should work equally well regardless of
> what we pick.
>
> I've used both gitlab and github for medium-sized projects, and found
> them both to be usable and performant.  Inkscape is larger and more
> complex, but so far I haven't seen any reason that either of those
> options wouldn't do the basic job as well as the other.
>
>> > We also liked the integration between
>> > bzr and the LP bug tracker -- we'll lose this, although github/gitlab
>> > provide different integration opportunities that might compensate a
>> > bit.
>>
>> Since the last time we've discussed it LP's Git features have matured a
>> lot. I don't think that they're on par with Github/Gitlab yet, but we
>> should probably put into consideration just moving to Git and sticking
>> with LP, as it might be a simpler transition.
>
> You're right it should be included as an option.  If nothing else it has
> familiarity and inertia to change working in its favor.  I'm not sure
> how compelling a case can be made for it beyond that though.
>
> A large chunk of our transition pain will be developers adapting to git,
> and we'll have that regardless of any of the options.  The other chunk
> is the web interface and I suppose there's some advantage with Launchpad
> of sticking with the familiar.
>
> However, Launchpad has remained understaffed for years, and
> unfortunately it really shows.  The chances of reaching parity with
> github/gitlab seem slim to none.  And once their development attention
> moves on to the next feature development effort, ongoing maintenance of
> the service is going to become an issue, as it already has in so many
> other places.
>
> Like gitlab, launchpad is open source.  I've contributed LP code
> myself.  I don't know if we're likely to invest development energy here,
> but both gitlab and LP seem on the same level here.  gitlab seems to
> have a more active development community though.
>
>> > Let me know your thoughts, and help us drive towards a consensus for
>> > github or gitlab.
>>
>> For me, right now, my feelings are towards Gitlab. I think that we
>> should stick with a FOSS solution overall and Github doesn't have
>> enough advantages to override that.
>
> There was a ticket on our github account with people pushing for github
> adoption.  I'll touch base with them to gather their input, but at this
> point I agree with you it seems gitlab is looking the better option for
> Inkscape.
>
> Bryce
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Inkscape-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>
> ----- End forwarded message -----

----- End forwarded message -----

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
Training and support from Colfax.
Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Getting to git

DASPRiD
Just putting my two cents in here as well.

 From my experience, probably most open source developers have a GitHub
account, which means that forking and working on Inkscape would be less
pain if it'd be hosted there.

On 10.01.2017 19:14, Bryce Harrington wrote:

> ----- Forwarded message from Will Entriken <[hidden email]> -----
>
> Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 22:04:20 -0500
> From: Will Entriken <[hidden email]>
> To: Bryce Harrington <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] Getting to git]
>
> Bryce,
>
> Thanks for keeping me in the loop.
>
> I am very glad to hear about this update. And I fully expect much more
> participation in the project as soon as we open this floodgate. With a
> good amount of focus and direction, we should be able to get to 1.0.0
> quickly.
>
> Here's my two cents on the GitLab / GitHub choice. GitHub is my
> default choice because it is the most popular and it works well
> enough. The largest project I contribute to there is
> https://github.com/chartjs/Chart.js and GitHub has no pain points in
> dealing with that project. I am more than happy to pick
> indie/non-popular choices if they are better. And if attracting
> developers and casual contributions is the goal then I do not think
> GitLab is better.
>
> More thorough discussion:
>  * Top 10 projects of all time on GitLab:
> https://gitlab.com/explore/projects/starred
>  * Top 10 projects this week on GitHub: https://github.com/trending?since=weekly
>  * Random projects I started:
> https://github.com/fulldecent?language=&page=2&q=&tab=repositories&type=source&utf8=%E2%9C%93
>
> Projects got more exposure (measured in stars) this week on GitHub
> than the whole history of GitLab. And my random pet projects (which
> are way less notable than Inkscape) would rank displace the #1, #2 and
> #6 projects on GitLab. Therefore I think Inkscape would be a big fish
> in a small pond there.
>
> Please feel free to copy this to the mailing list.
>
> Thank you,
> Will
>
>
> William Entriken
> 267-738-4201
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 2:32 PM, Bryce Harrington
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Hi fulldecent,
>>
>> I know you've been very active in maintaining the Inkscape mirror on
>> github.  You'll be pleased to hear the project is finally getting around
>> to its git migration planning.
>>
>> We're debating gitlab vs. github as our way forward, and while we're
>> still pretty early in discussion currently consensus appears to be
>> favoring gitlab.  I'd like to make sure we loop you in (and any others
>> you've worked with on the github mirror) to make sure we have plenty of
>> input and information before reaching any decisions.
>>
>> Feel free to either chime in on the mailing list with your thoughts, or
>> just reply to me and I'll pass them along.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Bryce
>>
>> ----- Forwarded message from Bryce Harrington <[hidden email]> -----
>>
>> Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 11:21:28 -0800
>> From: Bryce Harrington <[hidden email]>
>> To: Ted Gould <[hidden email]>
>> Cc: [hidden email]
>> Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] Getting to git
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 08:56:50AM -0600, Ted Gould wrote:
>>> I think where this mindshare comes into play is less with drive-by
>>> contributions as much as integrations with other services. There are a
>>> lot of cool tools built that "just work" with Github. Some only support
>>> that as a backend (even though they probably just grab git and work on
>>> it, they just don't have an option in the UI) What I'm not sure about
>>> is whether we'd end up using any of those services anyway.
>>
>> True, good points.  And yeah, most of the services I actually have in
>> mind for us just require git, so should work equally well regardless of
>> what we pick.
>>
>> I've used both gitlab and github for medium-sized projects, and found
>> them both to be usable and performant.  Inkscape is larger and more
>> complex, but so far I haven't seen any reason that either of those
>> options wouldn't do the basic job as well as the other.
>>
>>>> We also liked the integration between
>>>> bzr and the LP bug tracker -- we'll lose this, although github/gitlab
>>>> provide different integration opportunities that might compensate a
>>>> bit.
>>>
>>> Since the last time we've discussed it LP's Git features have matured a
>>> lot. I don't think that they're on par with Github/Gitlab yet, but we
>>> should probably put into consideration just moving to Git and sticking
>>> with LP, as it might be a simpler transition.
>>
>> You're right it should be included as an option.  If nothing else it has
>> familiarity and inertia to change working in its favor.  I'm not sure
>> how compelling a case can be made for it beyond that though.
>>
>> A large chunk of our transition pain will be developers adapting to git,
>> and we'll have that regardless of any of the options.  The other chunk
>> is the web interface and I suppose there's some advantage with Launchpad
>> of sticking with the familiar.
>>
>> However, Launchpad has remained understaffed for years, and
>> unfortunately it really shows.  The chances of reaching parity with
>> github/gitlab seem slim to none.  And once their development attention
>> moves on to the next feature development effort, ongoing maintenance of
>> the service is going to become an issue, as it already has in so many
>> other places.
>>
>> Like gitlab, launchpad is open source.  I've contributed LP code
>> myself.  I don't know if we're likely to invest development energy here,
>> but both gitlab and LP seem on the same level here.  gitlab seems to
>> have a more active development community though.
>>
>>>> Let me know your thoughts, and help us drive towards a consensus for
>>>> github or gitlab.
>>>
>>> For me, right now, my feelings are towards Gitlab. I think that we
>>> should stick with a FOSS solution overall and Github doesn't have
>>> enough advantages to override that.
>>
>> There was a ticket on our github account with people pushing for github
>> adoption.  I'll touch base with them to gather their input, but at this
>> point I agree with you it seems gitlab is looking the better option for
>> Inkscape.
>>
>> Bryce
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> Inkscape-devel mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>>
>> ----- End forwarded message -----
>
> ----- End forwarded message -----
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
> Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
> With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
> Training and support from Colfax.
> Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
> _______________________________________________
> Inkscape-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>

--
Ben Scholzen
http://www.dasprids.de


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
Training and support from Colfax.
Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel

smime.p7s (4K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Getting to git

Maren Hachmann
Now I hope that I will also be heard, even if I am not an Inkscape
developer (but help with the website, which is also supposed to move,
even to move first).

I've been using github for a couple of small projects (gitlab didn't
really exist yet when I opened that account) for a couple of years, and
also collaborated on a handful of other projects there, so had a chance
to get acquainted with their interface.

The Inkscape project, however, I'd prefer to see on gitlab, a fellow
open source project. They are making an impact not only on the web, but
also on people's own servers, which may be a reason why their own
project is the most-loved and most-discussed one in their listing. If
Inkscape moves there, we could really make an impact for them, too.

As ideology is a very un-practical argument (but nonetheless very
important to me), I've spent yesterday night to look into gitlab and to
investigate what they offer. These are my main findings:

Github -> Gitlab user flow
--------------------------
- One of the main things to note is that you do *not* even need a new
account for it, if you're a github user. You can use OAuth, and login
with your github user name.

- Importing your own projects from github works just as easily. Allow
gitlab to access them, select from a list, wait a couple of seconds, and
it's all there, including issues.

Interface
---------

- I didn't like their interface, when I was logged out, because it
didn't seem suitable for working on a desktop computer. After logging in
and exploring, I found it's configurable, and I don't need to use the
100% width, but can have a menu at the left.

- They seem to like and support open formats, like SVG. This shows in
them displaying uploaded SVGs in img tags in comments. This also shows
in SVG user avatars being allowed - I've never before used a web service
where that works.

- I like that they support text formatting almost everywhere (I could do
without the emojis, but they seem to be en vogue).

Functionality
-------------

- The functionality that invites 'drive-by' edits seems to be identical
to github's (i.e. forking + their code editor). Diff pages look the same
to me. Comments on commit diffs work, too.

- Repos appear to have a 10GB limit.

- Here's a list of things that they may charge for, which are currently
free / unlimited:
https://about.gitlab.com/gitlab-com/ (at the bottom)
I don't have enough info to tell if any of that can become a problem
(maybe the build minutes).
Also, I don't have github data to compare.

- I know that bug reports are not supposed to move along with Inkscape
(although I don't know the exact reasons, and think it's dangerous to
introduce this kind of divide between users and developers), but looked
at that, too. They have a little less functionality than the very
elaborate filtering that is possible on lp. Nothing that would prevent
me from using those for inkscape-web, though. The things that aren't
available could be replaced by tags. They support the creation of
different report templates. Ordering by 'likes' (which could be the
equivalent of the 'affects me, too' button on lp) is possible, too.
Their 'issue board' looks like half of a Trello board.

- As someone stated before, their CI seems to develop. This is a thing
that I can't really investigate, because I don't know enough about what
is needed (I only know that after Johan left, the existing Jenkins
server at http://jenkins.inkscape.org/ wasn't cared for by anyone on a
regular basis).

Could someone with the required knowledge do a re-evaluation?
Start here: https://gitlab.com/help/ci/quick_start/README
(does the option to upload docker images mean that one could use
anything that one could possibly want to use?)
Here someone used it, but could have been on their private installation:
http://ghostlyrics.net/building-and-deploying-a-c-library-with-gitlab.html

- I also couldn't test their groups/permission management.

- They do have an API, which seems to allow to do everything from the
command line, or to write one's own scripts that do anything that their
interface doesn't (https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/api/README.html)

Conclusion
----------

So, in conclusion, for inkscape-web, gitlab seems to be more than
sufficient. For Inkscape-the-program, I'd like to see it there rather
than on github. The things that I can compare are at least equivalent,
and it has the additional benefit of being open source, but I cannot
evaluate all the features properly.

Maybe contacting them would also be interesting. Who knows if they
wouldn't want to offer help for a project as popular as Inkscape?

Maren

Am 10.01.2017 um 19:25 schrieb Ben Scholzen:

> Just putting my two cents in here as well.
>
> From my experience, probably most open source developers have a GitHub
> account, which means that forking and working on Inkscape would be less
> pain if it'd be hosted there.
>
> On 10.01.2017 19:14, Bryce Harrington wrote:
>> ----- Forwarded message from Will Entriken <[hidden email]> -----
>>
>> Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 22:04:20 -0500
>> From: Will Entriken <[hidden email]>
>> To: Bryce Harrington <[hidden email]>
>> Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] Getting to git]
>>
>> Bryce,
>>
>> Thanks for keeping me in the loop.
>>
>> I am very glad to hear about this update. And I fully expect much more
>> participation in the project as soon as we open this floodgate. With a
>> good amount of focus and direction, we should be able to get to 1.0.0
>> quickly.
>>
>> Here's my two cents on the GitLab / GitHub choice. GitHub is my
>> default choice because it is the most popular and it works well
>> enough. The largest project I contribute to there is
>> https://github.com/chartjs/Chart.js and GitHub has no pain points in
>> dealing with that project. I am more than happy to pick
>> indie/non-popular choices if they are better. And if attracting
>> developers and casual contributions is the goal then I do not think
>> GitLab is better.
>>
>> More thorough discussion:
>>  * Top 10 projects of all time on GitLab:
>> https://gitlab.com/explore/projects/starred
>>  * Top 10 projects this week on GitHub:
>> https://github.com/trending?since=weekly
>>  * Random projects I started:
>> https://github.com/fulldecent?language=&page=2&q=&tab=repositories&type=source&utf8=%E2%9C%93
>>
>>
>> Projects got more exposure (measured in stars) this week on GitHub
>> than the whole history of GitLab. And my random pet projects (which
>> are way less notable than Inkscape) would rank displace the #1, #2 and
>> #6 projects on GitLab. Therefore I think Inkscape would be a big fish
>> in a small pond there.
>>
>> Please feel free to copy this to the mailing list.
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Will
>>
>>
>> William Entriken
>> 267-738-4201
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 2:32 PM, Bryce Harrington
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Hi fulldecent,
>>>
>>> I know you've been very active in maintaining the Inkscape mirror on
>>> github.  You'll be pleased to hear the project is finally getting around
>>> to its git migration planning.
>>>
>>> We're debating gitlab vs. github as our way forward, and while we're
>>> still pretty early in discussion currently consensus appears to be
>>> favoring gitlab.  I'd like to make sure we loop you in (and any others
>>> you've worked with on the github mirror) to make sure we have plenty of
>>> input and information before reaching any decisions.
>>>
>>> Feel free to either chime in on the mailing list with your thoughts, or
>>> just reply to me and I'll pass them along.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Bryce
>>>
>>> ----- Forwarded message from Bryce Harrington
>>> <[hidden email]> -----
>>>
>>> Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 11:21:28 -0800
>>> From: Bryce Harrington <[hidden email]>
>>> To: Ted Gould <[hidden email]>
>>> Cc: [hidden email]
>>> Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] Getting to git
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 08:56:50AM -0600, Ted Gould wrote:
>>>> I think where this mindshare comes into play is less with drive-by
>>>> contributions as much as integrations with other services. There are a
>>>> lot of cool tools built that "just work" with Github. Some only support
>>>> that as a backend (even though they probably just grab git and work on
>>>> it, they just don't have an option in the UI) What I'm not sure about
>>>> is whether we'd end up using any of those services anyway.
>>>
>>> True, good points.  And yeah, most of the services I actually have in
>>> mind for us just require git, so should work equally well regardless of
>>> what we pick.
>>>
>>> I've used both gitlab and github for medium-sized projects, and found
>>> them both to be usable and performant.  Inkscape is larger and more
>>> complex, but so far I haven't seen any reason that either of those
>>> options wouldn't do the basic job as well as the other.
>>>
>>>>> We also liked the integration between
>>>>> bzr and the LP bug tracker -- we'll lose this, although github/gitlab
>>>>> provide different integration opportunities that might compensate a
>>>>> bit.
>>>>
>>>> Since the last time we've discussed it LP's Git features have matured a
>>>> lot. I don't think that they're on par with Github/Gitlab yet, but we
>>>> should probably put into consideration just moving to Git and sticking
>>>> with LP, as it might be a simpler transition.
>>>
>>> You're right it should be included as an option.  If nothing else it has
>>> familiarity and inertia to change working in its favor.  I'm not sure
>>> how compelling a case can be made for it beyond that though.
>>>
>>> A large chunk of our transition pain will be developers adapting to git,
>>> and we'll have that regardless of any of the options.  The other chunk
>>> is the web interface and I suppose there's some advantage with Launchpad
>>> of sticking with the familiar.
>>>
>>> However, Launchpad has remained understaffed for years, and
>>> unfortunately it really shows.  The chances of reaching parity with
>>> github/gitlab seem slim to none.  And once their development attention
>>> moves on to the next feature development effort, ongoing maintenance of
>>> the service is going to become an issue, as it already has in so many
>>> other places.
>>>
>>> Like gitlab, launchpad is open source.  I've contributed LP code
>>> myself.  I don't know if we're likely to invest development energy here,
>>> but both gitlab and LP seem on the same level here.  gitlab seems to
>>> have a more active development community though.
>>>
>>>>> Let me know your thoughts, and help us drive towards a consensus for
>>>>> github or gitlab.
>>>>
>>>> For me, right now, my feelings are towards Gitlab. I think that we
>>>> should stick with a FOSS solution overall and Github doesn't have
>>>> enough advantages to override that.
>>>
>>> There was a ticket on our github account with people pushing for github
>>> adoption.  I'll touch base with them to gather their input, but at this
>>> point I agree with you it seems gitlab is looking the better option for
>>> Inkscape.
>>>
>>> Bryce
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Inkscape-devel mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>>>
>>> ----- End forwarded message -----
>>
>> ----- End forwarded message -----
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
>> Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
>> With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
>> Training and support from Colfax.
>> Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
>> _______________________________________________
>> Inkscape-devel mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
> Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
> With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
> Training and support from Colfax.
> Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Inkscape-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
Training and support from Colfax.
Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Getting to git

Victor Westmann
I agree with this phrase:

"Therefore I think Inkscape would be a big fish
in a small pond there."

We really need to grow as a community and that means more exposure and being where developers are. Where contributors are.



--Victor Westmann

2017-01-10 17:36 GMT-08:00 Maren Hachmann <[hidden email]>:
Now I hope that I will also be heard, even if I am not an Inkscape
developer (but help with the website, which is also supposed to move,
even to move first).

I've been using github for a couple of small projects (gitlab didn't
really exist yet when I opened that account) for a couple of years, and
also collaborated on a handful of other projects there, so had a chance
to get acquainted with their interface.

The Inkscape project, however, I'd prefer to see on gitlab, a fellow
open source project. They are making an impact not only on the web, but
also on people's own servers, which may be a reason why their own
project is the most-loved and most-discussed one in their listing. If
Inkscape moves there, we could really make an impact for them, too.

As ideology is a very un-practical argument (but nonetheless very
important to me), I've spent yesterday night to look into gitlab and to
investigate what they offer. These are my main findings:

Github -> Gitlab user flow
--------------------------
- One of the main things to note is that you do *not* even need a new
account for it, if you're a github user. You can use OAuth, and login
with your github user name.

- Importing your own projects from github works just as easily. Allow
gitlab to access them, select from a list, wait a couple of seconds, and
it's all there, including issues.

Interface
---------

- I didn't like their interface, when I was logged out, because it
didn't seem suitable for working on a desktop computer. After logging in
and exploring, I found it's configurable, and I don't need to use the
100% width, but can have a menu at the left.

- They seem to like and support open formats, like SVG. This shows in
them displaying uploaded SVGs in img tags in comments. This also shows
in SVG user avatars being allowed - I've never before used a web service
where that works.

- I like that they support text formatting almost everywhere (I could do
without the emojis, but they seem to be en vogue).

Functionality
-------------

- The functionality that invites 'drive-by' edits seems to be identical
to github's (i.e. forking + their code editor). Diff pages look the same
to me. Comments on commit diffs work, too.

- Repos appear to have a 10GB limit.

- Here's a list of things that they may charge for, which are currently
free / unlimited:
https://about.gitlab.com/gitlab-com/ (at the bottom)
I don't have enough info to tell if any of that can become a problem
(maybe the build minutes).
Also, I don't have github data to compare.

- I know that bug reports are not supposed to move along with Inkscape
(although I don't know the exact reasons, and think it's dangerous to
introduce this kind of divide between users and developers), but looked
at that, too. They have a little less functionality than the very
elaborate filtering that is possible on lp. Nothing that would prevent
me from using those for inkscape-web, though. The things that aren't
available could be replaced by tags. They support the creation of
different report templates. Ordering by 'likes' (which could be the
equivalent of the 'affects me, too' button on lp) is possible, too.
Their 'issue board' looks like half of a Trello board.

- As someone stated before, their CI seems to develop. This is a thing
that I can't really investigate, because I don't know enough about what
is needed (I only know that after Johan left, the existing Jenkins
server at http://jenkins.inkscape.org/ wasn't cared for by anyone on a
regular basis).

Could someone with the required knowledge do a re-evaluation?
Start here: https://gitlab.com/help/ci/quick_start/README
(does the option to upload docker images mean that one could use
anything that one could possibly want to use?)
Here someone used it, but could have been on their private installation:
http://ghostlyrics.net/building-and-deploying-a-c-library-with-gitlab.html

- I also couldn't test their groups/permission management.

- They do have an API, which seems to allow to do everything from the
command line, or to write one's own scripts that do anything that their
interface doesn't (https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/api/README.html)

Conclusion
----------

So, in conclusion, for inkscape-web, gitlab seems to be more than
sufficient. For Inkscape-the-program, I'd like to see it there rather
than on github. The things that I can compare are at least equivalent,
and it has the additional benefit of being open source, but I cannot
evaluate all the features properly.

Maybe contacting them would also be interesting. Who knows if they
wouldn't want to offer help for a project as popular as Inkscape?

Maren

Am 10.01.2017 um 19:25 schrieb Ben Scholzen:
> Just putting my two cents in here as well.
>
> From my experience, probably most open source developers have a GitHub
> account, which means that forking and working on Inkscape would be less
> pain if it'd be hosted there.
>
> On 10.01.2017 19:14, Bryce Harrington wrote:
>> ----- Forwarded message from Will Entriken <[hidden email]> -----
>>
>> Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 22:04:20 -0500
>> From: Will Entriken <[hidden email]>
>> To: Bryce Harrington <[hidden email]>
>> Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] Getting to git]
>>
>> Bryce,
>>
>> Thanks for keeping me in the loop.
>>
>> I am very glad to hear about this update. And I fully expect much more
>> participation in the project as soon as we open this floodgate. With a
>> good amount of focus and direction, we should be able to get to 1.0.0
>> quickly.
>>
>> Here's my two cents on the GitLab / GitHub choice. GitHub is my
>> default choice because it is the most popular and it works well
>> enough. The largest project I contribute to there is
>> https://github.com/chartjs/Chart.js and GitHub has no pain points in
>> dealing with that project. I am more than happy to pick
>> indie/non-popular choices if they are better. And if attracting
>> developers and casual contributions is the goal then I do not think
>> GitLab is better.
>>
>> More thorough discussion:
>>  * Top 10 projects of all time on GitLab:
>> https://gitlab.com/explore/projects/starred
>>  * Top 10 projects this week on GitHub:
>> https://github.com/trending?since=weekly
>>  * Random projects I started:
>> https://github.com/fulldecent?language=&page=2&q=&tab=repositories&type=source&utf8=%E2%9C%93
>>
>>
>> Projects got more exposure (measured in stars) this week on GitHub
>> than the whole history of GitLab. And my random pet projects (which
>> are way less notable than Inkscape) would rank displace the #1, #2 and
>> #6 projects on GitLab. Therefore I think Inkscape would be a big fish
>> in a small pond there.
>>
>> Please feel free to copy this to the mailing list.
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Will
>>
>>
>> William Entriken
>> 267-738-4201
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 2:32 PM, Bryce Harrington
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Hi fulldecent,
>>>
>>> I know you've been very active in maintaining the Inkscape mirror on
>>> github.  You'll be pleased to hear the project is finally getting around
>>> to its git migration planning.
>>>
>>> We're debating gitlab vs. github as our way forward, and while we're
>>> still pretty early in discussion currently consensus appears to be
>>> favoring gitlab.  I'd like to make sure we loop you in (and any others
>>> you've worked with on the github mirror) to make sure we have plenty of
>>> input and information before reaching any decisions.
>>>
>>> Feel free to either chime in on the mailing list with your thoughts, or
>>> just reply to me and I'll pass them along.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Bryce
>>>
>>> ----- Forwarded message from Bryce Harrington
>>> <[hidden email]> -----
>>>
>>> Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 11:21:28 -0800
>>> From: Bryce Harrington <[hidden email]>
>>> To: Ted Gould <[hidden email]>
>>> Cc: [hidden email]
>>> Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] Getting to git
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 08:56:50AM -0600, Ted Gould wrote:
>>>> I think where this mindshare comes into play is less with drive-by
>>>> contributions as much as integrations with other services. There are a
>>>> lot of cool tools built that "just work" with Github. Some only support
>>>> that as a backend (even though they probably just grab git and work on
>>>> it, they just don't have an option in the UI) What I'm not sure about
>>>> is whether we'd end up using any of those services anyway.
>>>
>>> True, good points.  And yeah, most of the services I actually have in
>>> mind for us just require git, so should work equally well regardless of
>>> what we pick.
>>>
>>> I've used both gitlab and github for medium-sized projects, and found
>>> them both to be usable and performant.  Inkscape is larger and more
>>> complex, but so far I haven't seen any reason that either of those
>>> options wouldn't do the basic job as well as the other.
>>>
>>>>> We also liked the integration between
>>>>> bzr and the LP bug tracker -- we'll lose this, although github/gitlab
>>>>> provide different integration opportunities that might compensate a
>>>>> bit.
>>>>
>>>> Since the last time we've discussed it LP's Git features have matured a
>>>> lot. I don't think that they're on par with Github/Gitlab yet, but we
>>>> should probably put into consideration just moving to Git and sticking
>>>> with LP, as it might be a simpler transition.
>>>
>>> You're right it should be included as an option.  If nothing else it has
>>> familiarity and inertia to change working in its favor.  I'm not sure
>>> how compelling a case can be made for it beyond that though.
>>>
>>> A large chunk of our transition pain will be developers adapting to git,
>>> and we'll have that regardless of any of the options.  The other chunk
>>> is the web interface and I suppose there's some advantage with Launchpad
>>> of sticking with the familiar.
>>>
>>> However, Launchpad has remained understaffed for years, and
>>> unfortunately it really shows.  The chances of reaching parity with
>>> github/gitlab seem slim to none.  And once their development attention
>>> moves on to the next feature development effort, ongoing maintenance of
>>> the service is going to become an issue, as it already has in so many
>>> other places.
>>>
>>> Like gitlab, launchpad is open source.  I've contributed LP code
>>> myself.  I don't know if we're likely to invest development energy here,
>>> but both gitlab and LP seem on the same level here.  gitlab seems to
>>> have a more active development community though.
>>>
>>>>> Let me know your thoughts, and help us drive towards a consensus for
>>>>> github or gitlab.
>>>>
>>>> For me, right now, my feelings are towards Gitlab. I think that we
>>>> should stick with a FOSS solution overall and Github doesn't have
>>>> enough advantages to override that.
>>>
>>> There was a ticket on our github account with people pushing for github
>>> adoption.  I'll touch base with them to gather their input, but at this
>>> point I agree with you it seems gitlab is looking the better option for
>>> Inkscape.
>>>
>>> Bryce
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Inkscape-devel mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>>>
>>> ----- End forwarded message -----
>>
>> ----- End forwarded message -----
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
>> Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
>> With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
>> Training and support from Colfax.
>> Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
>> _______________________________________________
>> Inkscape-devel mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
> Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
> With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
> Training and support from Colfax.
> Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Inkscape-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
Training and support from Colfax.
Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
Training and support from Colfax.
Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Getting to git

Mark Schafer

I was  interested to see how easy it was to live in github and gitlab at the same time and use the same user

http://docs.gitlab.com/ee/integration/github.html



On 1/11/2017 3:30 PM, Victor Westmann wrote:
I agree with this phrase:

"Therefore I think Inkscape would be a big fish
in a small pond there."

We really need to grow as a community and that means more exposure and being where developers are. Where contributors are.



--Victor Westmann

2017-01-10 17:36 GMT-08:00 Maren Hachmann <[hidden email]>:
Now I hope that I will also be heard, even if I am not an Inkscape
developer (but help with the website, which is also supposed to move,
even to move first).

I've been using github for a couple of small projects (gitlab didn't
really exist yet when I opened that account) for a couple of years, and
also collaborated on a handful of other projects there, so had a chance
to get acquainted with their interface.

The Inkscape project, however, I'd prefer to see on gitlab, a fellow
open source project. They are making an impact not only on the web, but
also on people's own servers, which may be a reason why their own
project is the most-loved and most-discussed one in their listing. If
Inkscape moves there, we could really make an impact for them, too.

As ideology is a very un-practical argument (but nonetheless very
important to me), I've spent yesterday night to look into gitlab and to
investigate what they offer. These are my main findings:

Github -> Gitlab user flow
--------------------------
- One of the main things to note is that you do *not* even need a new
account for it, if you're a github user. You can use OAuth, and login
with your github user name.

- Importing your own projects from github works just as easily. Allow
gitlab to access them, select from a list, wait a couple of seconds, and
it's all there, including issues.

Interface
---------

- I didn't like their interface, when I was logged out, because it
didn't seem suitable for working on a desktop computer. After logging in
and exploring, I found it's configurable, and I don't need to use the
100% width, but can have a menu at the left.

- They seem to like and support open formats, like SVG. This shows in
them displaying uploaded SVGs in img tags in comments. This also shows
in SVG user avatars being allowed - I've never before used a web service
where that works.

- I like that they support text formatting almost everywhere (I could do
without the emojis, but they seem to be en vogue).

Functionality
-------------

- The functionality that invites 'drive-by' edits seems to be identical
to github's (i.e. forking + their code editor). Diff pages look the same
to me. Comments on commit diffs work, too.

- Repos appear to have a 10GB limit.

- Here's a list of things that they may charge for, which are currently
free / unlimited:
https://about.gitlab.com/gitlab-com/ (at the bottom)
I don't have enough info to tell if any of that can become a problem
(maybe the build minutes).
Also, I don't have github data to compare.

- I know that bug reports are not supposed to move along with Inkscape
(although I don't know the exact reasons, and think it's dangerous to
introduce this kind of divide between users and developers), but looked
at that, too. They have a little less functionality than the very
elaborate filtering that is possible on lp. Nothing that would prevent
me from using those for inkscape-web, though. The things that aren't
available could be replaced by tags. They support the creation of
different report templates. Ordering by 'likes' (which could be the
equivalent of the 'affects me, too' button on lp) is possible, too.
Their 'issue board' looks like half of a Trello board.

- As someone stated before, their CI seems to develop. This is a thing
that I can't really investigate, because I don't know enough about what
is needed (I only know that after Johan left, the existing Jenkins
server at http://jenkins.inkscape.org/ wasn't cared for by anyone on a
regular basis).

Could someone with the required knowledge do a re-evaluation?
Start here: https://gitlab.com/help/ci/quick_start/README
(does the option to upload docker images mean that one could use
anything that one could possibly want to use?)
Here someone used it, but could have been on their private installation:
http://ghostlyrics.net/building-and-deploying-a-c-library-with-gitlab.html

- I also couldn't test their groups/permission management.

- They do have an API, which seems to allow to do everything from the
command line, or to write one's own scripts that do anything that their
interface doesn't (https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/api/README.html)

Conclusion
----------

So, in conclusion, for inkscape-web, gitlab seems to be more than
sufficient. For Inkscape-the-program, I'd like to see it there rather
than on github. The things that I can compare are at least equivalent,
and it has the additional benefit of being open source, but I cannot
evaluate all the features properly.

Maybe contacting them would also be interesting. Who knows if they
wouldn't want to offer help for a project as popular as Inkscape?

Maren

Am 10.01.2017 um 19:25 schrieb Ben Scholzen:
> Just putting my two cents in here as well.
>
> From my experience, probably most open source developers have a GitHub
> account, which means that forking and working on Inkscape would be less
> pain if it'd be hosted there.
>
> On 10.01.2017 19:14, Bryce Harrington wrote:
>> ----- Forwarded message from Will Entriken <[hidden email]> -----
>>
>> Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 22:04:20 -0500
>> From: Will Entriken <[hidden email]>
>> To: Bryce Harrington <[hidden email]>
>> Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] Getting to git]
>>
>> Bryce,
>>
>> Thanks for keeping me in the loop.
>>
>> I am very glad to hear about this update. And I fully expect much more
>> participation in the project as soon as we open this floodgate. With a
>> good amount of focus and direction, we should be able to get to 1.0.0
>> quickly.
>>
>> Here's my two cents on the GitLab / GitHub choice. GitHub is my
>> default choice because it is the most popular and it works well
>> enough. The largest project I contribute to there is
>> https://github.com/chartjs/Chart.js and GitHub has no pain points in
>> dealing with that project. I am more than happy to pick
>> indie/non-popular choices if they are better. And if attracting
>> developers and casual contributions is the goal then I do not think
>> GitLab is better.
>>
>> More thorough discussion:
>>  * Top 10 projects of all time on GitLab:
>> https://gitlab.com/explore/projects/starred
>>  * Top 10 projects this week on GitHub:
>> https://github.com/trending?since=weekly
>>  * Random projects I started:
>> https://github.com/fulldecent?language=&page=2&q=&tab=repositories&type=source&utf8=%E2%9C%93
>>
>>
>> Projects got more exposure (measured in stars) this week on GitHub
>> than the whole history of GitLab. And my random pet projects (which
>> are way less notable than Inkscape) would rank displace the #1, #2 and
>> #6 projects on GitLab. Therefore I think Inkscape would be a big fish
>> in a small pond there.
>>
>> Please feel free to copy this to the mailing list.
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Will
>>
>>
>> William Entriken
>> 267-738-4201
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 2:32 PM, Bryce Harrington
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Hi fulldecent,
>>>
>>> I know you've been very active in maintaining the Inkscape mirror on
>>> github.  You'll be pleased to hear the project is finally getting around
>>> to its git migration planning.
>>>
>>> We're debating gitlab vs. github as our way forward, and while we're
>>> still pretty early in discussion currently consensus appears to be
>>> favoring gitlab.  I'd like to make sure we loop you in (and any others
>>> you've worked with on the github mirror) to make sure we have plenty of
>>> input and information before reaching any decisions.
>>>
>>> Feel free to either chime in on the mailing list with your thoughts, or
>>> just reply to me and I'll pass them along.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Bryce
>>>
>>> ----- Forwarded message from Bryce Harrington
>>> <[hidden email]> -----
>>>
>>> Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 11:21:28 -0800
>>> From: Bryce Harrington <[hidden email]>
>>> To: Ted Gould <[hidden email]>
>>> Cc: [hidden email]
>>> Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] Getting to git
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 08:56:50AM -0600, Ted Gould wrote:
>>>> I think where this mindshare comes into play is less with drive-by
>>>> contributions as much as integrations with other services. There are a
>>>> lot of cool tools built that "just work" with Github. Some only support
>>>> that as a backend (even though they probably just grab git and work on
>>>> it, they just don't have an option in the UI) What I'm not sure about
>>>> is whether we'd end up using any of those services anyway.
>>>
>>> True, good points.  And yeah, most of the services I actually have in
>>> mind for us just require git, so should work equally well regardless of
>>> what we pick.
>>>
>>> I've used both gitlab and github for medium-sized projects, and found
>>> them both to be usable and performant.  Inkscape is larger and more
>>> complex, but so far I haven't seen any reason that either of those
>>> options wouldn't do the basic job as well as the other.
>>>
>>>>> We also liked the integration between
>>>>> bzr and the LP bug tracker -- we'll lose this, although github/gitlab
>>>>> provide different integration opportunities that might compensate a
>>>>> bit.
>>>>
>>>> Since the last time we've discussed it LP's Git features have matured a
>>>> lot. I don't think that they're on par with Github/Gitlab yet, but we
>>>> should probably put into consideration just moving to Git and sticking
>>>> with LP, as it might be a simpler transition.
>>>
>>> You're right it should be included as an option.  If nothing else it has
>>> familiarity and inertia to change working in its favor.  I'm not sure
>>> how compelling a case can be made for it beyond that though.
>>>
>>> A large chunk of our transition pain will be developers adapting to git,
>>> and we'll have that regardless of any of the options.  The other chunk
>>> is the web interface and I suppose there's some advantage with Launchpad
>>> of sticking with the familiar.
>>>
>>> However, Launchpad has remained understaffed for years, and
>>> unfortunately it really shows.  The chances of reaching parity with
>>> github/gitlab seem slim to none.  And once their development attention
>>> moves on to the next feature development effort, ongoing maintenance of
>>> the service is going to become an issue, as it already has in so many
>>> other places.
>>>
>>> Like gitlab, launchpad is open source.  I've contributed LP code
>>> myself.  I don't know if we're likely to invest development energy here,
>>> but both gitlab and LP seem on the same level here.  gitlab seems to
>>> have a more active development community though.
>>>
>>>>> Let me know your thoughts, and help us drive towards a consensus for
>>>>> github or gitlab.
>>>>
>>>> For me, right now, my feelings are towards Gitlab. I think that we
>>>> should stick with a FOSS solution overall and Github doesn't have
>>>> enough advantages to override that.
>>>
>>> There was a ticket on our github account with people pushing for github
>>> adoption.  I'll touch base with them to gather their input, but at this
>>> point I agree with you it seems gitlab is looking the better option for
>>> Inkscape.
>>>
>>> Bryce
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Inkscape-devel mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>>>
>>> ----- End forwarded message -----
>>
>> ----- End forwarded message -----
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
>> Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
>> With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
>> Training and support from Colfax.
>> Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
>> _______________________________________________
>> Inkscape-devel mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
> Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
> With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
> Training and support from Colfax.
> Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Inkscape-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
Training and support from Colfax.
Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
Training and support from Colfax.
Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi


_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel


No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2016.0.7996 / Virus Database: 4749/13743 - Release Date: 01/10/17



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
Training and support from Colfax.
Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Getting to git

Maren Hachmann
Am 11.01.2017 um 03:43 schrieb Mark Schafer:
> I was  interested to see how easy it was to live in github and gitlab at
> the same time and use the same user
>
> http://docs.gitlab.com/ee/integration/github.html
>

- The description is for a local installation of gitlab. On gitlab.org,
this works out of the box, as I described in my mail (first item).

Regards,
 Maren

> On 1/11/2017 3:30 PM, Victor Westmann wrote:
>> I agree with this phrase:
>>
>> "Therefore I think Inkscape would be a big fish
>> in a small pond there."
>>
>> We really need to grow as a community and that means more exposure and
>> being where developers are. Where contributors are.
>>
>>
>>
>> --Victor Westmann
>>
>> 2017-01-10 17:36 GMT-08:00 Maren Hachmann <[hidden email]
>> <mailto:[hidden email]>>:
>>
>>     Now I hope that I will also be heard, even if I am not an Inkscape
>>     developer (but help with the website, which is also supposed to move,
>>     even to move first).
>>
>>     I've been using github for a couple of small projects (gitlab didn't
>>     really exist yet when I opened that account) for a couple of
>>     years, and
>>     also collaborated on a handful of other projects there, so had a
>>     chance
>>     to get acquainted with their interface.
>>
>>     The Inkscape project, however, I'd prefer to see on gitlab, a fellow
>>     open source project. They are making an impact not only on the
>>     web, but
>>     also on people's own servers, which may be a reason why their own
>>     project is the most-loved and most-discussed one in their listing. If
>>     Inkscape moves there, we could really make an impact for them, too.
>>
>>     As ideology is a very un-practical argument (but nonetheless very
>>     important to me), I've spent yesterday night to look into gitlab
>>     and to
>>     investigate what they offer. These are my main findings:
>>
>>     Github -> Gitlab user flow
>>     --------------------------
>>     - One of the main things to note is that you do *not* even need a new
>>     account for it, if you're a github user. You can use OAuth, and login
>>     with your github user name.
>>
>>     - Importing your own projects from github works just as easily. Allow
>>     gitlab to access them, select from a list, wait a couple of
>>     seconds, and
>>     it's all there, including issues.
>>
>>     Interface
>>     ---------
>>
>>     - I didn't like their interface, when I was logged out, because it
>>     didn't seem suitable for working on a desktop computer. After
>>     logging in
>>     and exploring, I found it's configurable, and I don't need to use the
>>     100% width, but can have a menu at the left.
>>
>>     - They seem to like and support open formats, like SVG. This shows in
>>     them displaying uploaded SVGs in img tags in comments. This also shows
>>     in SVG user avatars being allowed - I've never before used a web
>>     service
>>     where that works.
>>
>>     - I like that they support text formatting almost everywhere (I
>>     could do
>>     without the emojis, but they seem to be en vogue).
>>
>>     Functionality
>>     -------------
>>
>>     - The functionality that invites 'drive-by' edits seems to be
>>     identical
>>     to github's (i.e. forking + their code editor). Diff pages look
>>     the same
>>     to me. Comments on commit diffs work, too.
>>
>>     - Repos appear to have a 10GB limit.
>>
>>     - Here's a list of things that they may charge for, which are
>>     currently
>>     free / unlimited:
>>     https://about.gitlab.com/gitlab-com/
>>     <https://about.gitlab.com/gitlab-com/> (at the bottom)
>>     I don't have enough info to tell if any of that can become a problem
>>     (maybe the build minutes).
>>     Also, I don't have github data to compare.
>>
>>     - I know that bug reports are not supposed to move along with Inkscape
>>     (although I don't know the exact reasons, and think it's dangerous to
>>     introduce this kind of divide between users and developers), but
>>     looked
>>     at that, too. They have a little less functionality than the very
>>     elaborate filtering that is possible on lp. Nothing that would prevent
>>     me from using those for inkscape-web, though. The things that aren't
>>     available could be replaced by tags. They support the creation of
>>     different report templates. Ordering by 'likes' (which could be the
>>     equivalent of the 'affects me, too' button on lp) is possible, too.
>>     Their 'issue board' looks like half of a Trello board.
>>
>>     - As someone stated before, their CI seems to develop. This is a thing
>>     that I can't really investigate, because I don't know enough about
>>     what
>>     is needed (I only know that after Johan left, the existing Jenkins
>>     server at http://jenkins.inkscape.org/ wasn't cared for by anyone on a
>>     regular basis).
>>
>>     Could someone with the required knowledge do a re-evaluation?
>>     Start here: https://gitlab.com/help/ci/quick_start/README
>>     <https://gitlab.com/help/ci/quick_start/README>
>>     (does the option to upload docker images mean that one could use
>>     anything that one could possibly want to use?)
>>     Here someone used it, but could have been on their private
>>     installation:
>>     http://ghostlyrics.net/building-and-deploying-a-c-library-with-gitlab.html
>>     <http://ghostlyrics.net/building-and-deploying-a-c-library-with-gitlab.html>
>>
>>     - I also couldn't test their groups/permission management.
>>
>>     - They do have an API, which seems to allow to do everything from the
>>     command line, or to write one's own scripts that do anything that
>>     their
>>     interface doesn't (https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/api/README.html
>>     <https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/api/README.html>)
>>
>>     Conclusion
>>     ----------
>>
>>     So, in conclusion, for inkscape-web, gitlab seems to be more than
>>     sufficient. For Inkscape-the-program, I'd like to see it there rather
>>     than on github. The things that I can compare are at least equivalent,
>>     and it has the additional benefit of being open source, but I cannot
>>     evaluate all the features properly.
>>
>>     Maybe contacting them would also be interesting. Who knows if they
>>     wouldn't want to offer help for a project as popular as Inkscape?
>>
>>     Maren
>>
>>     Am 10.01.2017 um 19:25 schrieb Ben Scholzen:
>>     > Just putting my two cents in here as well.
>>     >
>>     > From my experience, probably most open source developers have a
>>     GitHub
>>     > account, which means that forking and working on Inkscape would
>>     be less
>>     > pain if it'd be hosted there.
>>     >
>>     > On 10.01.2017 19:14, Bryce Harrington wrote:
>>     >> ----- Forwarded message from Will Entriken
>>     <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> -----
>>     >>
>>     >> Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2017 22:04:20 -0500
>>     >> From: Will Entriken <[hidden email]
>>     <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>>     >> To: Bryce Harrington <[hidden email]
>>     <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>>     >> Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] Getting to git]
>>     >>
>>     >> Bryce,
>>     >>
>>     >> Thanks for keeping me in the loop.
>>     >>
>>     >> I am very glad to hear about this update. And I fully expect
>>     much more
>>     >> participation in the project as soon as we open this floodgate.
>>     With a
>>     >> good amount of focus and direction, we should be able to get to
>>     1.0.0
>>     >> quickly.
>>     >>
>>     >> Here's my two cents on the GitLab / GitHub choice. GitHub is my
>>     >> default choice because it is the most popular and it works well
>>     >> enough. The largest project I contribute to there is
>>     >> https://github.com/chartjs/Chart.js
>>     <https://github.com/chartjs/Chart.js> and GitHub has no pain points in
>>     >> dealing with that project. I am more than happy to pick
>>     >> indie/non-popular choices if they are better. And if attracting
>>     >> developers and casual contributions is the goal then I do not think
>>     >> GitLab is better.
>>     >>
>>     >> More thorough discussion:
>>     >>  * Top 10 projects of all time on GitLab:
>>     >> https://gitlab.com/explore/projects/starred
>>     <https://gitlab.com/explore/projects/starred>
>>     >>  * Top 10 projects this week on GitHub:
>>     >> https://github.com/trending?since=weekly
>>     <https://github.com/trending?since=weekly>
>>     >>  * Random projects I started:
>>     >>
>>     https://github.com/fulldecent?language=&page=2&q=&tab=repositories&type=source&utf8=%E2%9C%93
>>     <https://github.com/fulldecent?language=&page=2&q=&tab=repositories&type=source&utf8=%E2%9C%93>
>>     >>
>>     >>
>>     >> Projects got more exposure (measured in stars) this week on GitHub
>>     >> than the whole history of GitLab. And my random pet projects (which
>>     >> are way less notable than Inkscape) would rank displace the #1,
>>     #2 and
>>     >> #6 projects on GitLab. Therefore I think Inkscape would be a
>>     big fish
>>     >> in a small pond there.
>>     >>
>>     >> Please feel free to copy this to the mailing list.
>>     >>
>>     >> Thank you,
>>     >> Will
>>     >>
>>     >>
>>     >> William Entriken
>>     >> 267-738-4201
>>     >>
>>     >>
>>     >>
>>     >> On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 2:32 PM, Bryce Harrington
>>     >> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>>     wrote:
>>     >>> Hi fulldecent,
>>     >>>
>>     >>> I know you've been very active in maintaining the Inkscape
>>     mirror on
>>     >>> github.  You'll be pleased to hear the project is finally
>>     getting around
>>     >>> to its git migration planning.
>>     >>>
>>     >>> We're debating gitlab vs. github as our way forward, and while
>>     we're
>>     >>> still pretty early in discussion currently consensus appears to be
>>     >>> favoring gitlab.  I'd like to make sure we loop you in (and
>>     any others
>>     >>> you've worked with on the github mirror) to make sure we have
>>     plenty of
>>     >>> input and information before reaching any decisions.
>>     >>>
>>     >>> Feel free to either chime in on the mailing list with your
>>     thoughts, or
>>     >>> just reply to me and I'll pass them along.
>>     >>>
>>     >>> Thanks,
>>     >>> Bryce
>>     >>>
>>     >>> ----- Forwarded message from Bryce Harrington
>>     >>> <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>>     -----
>>     >>>
>>     >>> Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 11:21:28 -0800
>>     >>> From: Bryce Harrington <[hidden email]
>>     <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>>     >>> To: Ted Gould <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>>     >>> Cc: [hidden email]
>>     <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>     >>> Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] Getting to git
>>     >>>
>>     >>> On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 08:56:50AM -0600, Ted Gould wrote:
>>     >>>> I think where this mindshare comes into play is less with
>>     drive-by
>>     >>>> contributions as much as integrations with other services.
>>     There are a
>>     >>>> lot of cool tools built that "just work" with Github. Some
>>     only support
>>     >>>> that as a backend (even though they probably just grab git
>>     and work on
>>     >>>> it, they just don't have an option in the UI) What I'm not
>>     sure about
>>     >>>> is whether we'd end up using any of those services anyway.
>>     >>>
>>     >>> True, good points.  And yeah, most of the services I actually
>>     have in
>>     >>> mind for us just require git, so should work equally well
>>     regardless of
>>     >>> what we pick.
>>     >>>
>>     >>> I've used both gitlab and github for medium-sized projects,
>>     and found
>>     >>> them both to be usable and performant.  Inkscape is larger and
>>     more
>>     >>> complex, but so far I haven't seen any reason that either of those
>>     >>> options wouldn't do the basic job as well as the other.
>>     >>>
>>     >>>>> We also liked the integration between
>>     >>>>> bzr and the LP bug tracker -- we'll lose this, although
>>     github/gitlab
>>     >>>>> provide different integration opportunities that might
>>     compensate a
>>     >>>>> bit.
>>     >>>>
>>     >>>> Since the last time we've discussed it LP's Git features have
>>     matured a
>>     >>>> lot. I don't think that they're on par with Github/Gitlab
>>     yet, but we
>>     >>>> should probably put into consideration just moving to Git and
>>     sticking
>>     >>>> with LP, as it might be a simpler transition.
>>     >>>
>>     >>> You're right it should be included as an option.  If nothing
>>     else it has
>>     >>> familiarity and inertia to change working in its favor.  I'm
>>     not sure
>>     >>> how compelling a case can be made for it beyond that though.
>>     >>>
>>     >>> A large chunk of our transition pain will be developers
>>     adapting to git,
>>     >>> and we'll have that regardless of any of the options.  The
>>     other chunk
>>     >>> is the web interface and I suppose there's some advantage with
>>     Launchpad
>>     >>> of sticking with the familiar.
>>     >>>
>>     >>> However, Launchpad has remained understaffed for years, and
>>     >>> unfortunately it really shows.  The chances of reaching parity
>>     with
>>     >>> github/gitlab seem slim to none.  And once their development
>>     attention
>>     >>> moves on to the next feature development effort, ongoing
>>     maintenance of
>>     >>> the service is going to become an issue, as it already has in
>>     so many
>>     >>> other places.
>>     >>>
>>     >>> Like gitlab, launchpad is open source.  I've contributed LP code
>>     >>> myself.  I don't know if we're likely to invest development
>>     energy here,
>>     >>> but both gitlab and LP seem on the same level here.  gitlab
>>     seems to
>>     >>> have a more active development community though.
>>     >>>
>>     >>>>> Let me know your thoughts, and help us drive towards a
>>     consensus for
>>     >>>>> github or gitlab.
>>     >>>>
>>     >>>> For me, right now, my feelings are towards Gitlab. I think
>>     that we
>>     >>>> should stick with a FOSS solution overall and Github doesn't have
>>     >>>> enough advantages to override that.
>>     >>>
>>     >>> There was a ticket on our github account with people pushing
>>     for github
>>     >>> adoption.  I'll touch base with them to gather their input,
>>     but at this
>>     >>> point I agree with you it seems gitlab is looking the better
>>     option for
>>     >>> Inkscape.
>>     >>>
>>     >>> Bryce
>>     >>>
>>     >>>
>>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>     >>>
>>     >>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>>     >>> engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>>     >>> _______________________________________________
>>     >>> Inkscape-devel mailing list
>>     >>> [hidden email]
>>     <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>     >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>>     <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel>
>>     >>>
>>     >>> ----- End forwarded message -----
>>     >>
>>     >> ----- End forwarded message -----
>>     >>
>>     >>
>>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>     >>
>>     >> Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
>>     >> Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
>>     >> With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
>>     >> Training and support from Colfax.
>>     >> Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
>>     >> _______________________________________________
>>     >> Inkscape-devel mailing list
>>     >> [hidden email]
>>     <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>     >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>>     <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel>
>>     >>
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>     > Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
>>     > Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
>>     > With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
>>     > Training and support from Colfax.
>>     > Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > _______________________________________________
>>     > Inkscape-devel mailing list
>>     > [hidden email]
>>     <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>     > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>>     <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel>
>>     >
>>
>>
>>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>     Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
>>     Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
>>     With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
>>     Training and support from Colfax.
>>     Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Inkscape-devel mailing list
>>     [hidden email]
>>     <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>     https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>>     <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
>> Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
>> With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
>> Training and support from Colfax.
>> Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Inkscape-devel mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>>
>>
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/email-signature>
>> Version: 2016.0.7996 / Virus Database: 4749/13743 - Release Date: 01/10/17
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
> Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
> With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
> Training and support from Colfax.
> Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Inkscape-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
Training and support from Colfax.
Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Getting to git

Bryce Harrington-3
In reply to this post by Tavmjong Bah
On Fri, Jan 06, 2017 at 10:28:35AM +0100, Tavmjong Bah wrote:

>
> A couple comments:
>
> 1. lib2geom already uses git
> 2. The biggest problem with git is the lack of human readable
> sequential revision numbering... but it seems this can be worked
> around. See, for example:
>
>   https://cd34.com/blog/programming/using-git-to-generate-an-automatic-
> version-number/
 
Hi Tav, have you had a chance to look at or play with github and gitlab
enough to form an opinion?  If not, what aspects of the change would you
feel to be important for us to keep in consideration?

Bryce
 

> On Fri, 2017-01-06 at 00:51 -0800, Bryce Harrington wrote:
> >     "The time has come," the Walrus said,
> >     "To talk of many things:
> >     Of shoes — and ships — and sealing-wax—
> >     Of cabbages — and kings —
> >     And why the sea is boiling hot—
> >
> >     And whether Inkscape should switch to gitlab or github or
> > entirely other things."
> >
> > At Hackfest 2015 we broached the topic of moving to git, and while
> > recognizing it as probably inevitable, decided to take care of a few
> > other things like switching to cmake first, and getting a release out
> > the door, and getting going with Gtk3 and C++-11.
> >
> > That release is out the door, cmake is done, Gtk3 is landed in trunk,
> > C++-11 work is under way, and so I think it's time we start on
> > tackling
> > git.
> >
> > When we last visited this discussion, there was a consensus that yes
> > we
> > should move to git, and that rather than self-hosting a plain git
> > repo
> > (ala freedesktop), we would be better to look at an integrated
> > platform
> > like github or gitlab.  But there was not a consensus as to which of
> > those two to pick.
> >
> > So the task at hand is to discuss and deliberate the two and decide
> > which should be our focus.  Both have interesting pros and cons, and
> > I
> > don't think the decision is clear cut.
> >
> > Where should we go?
> >
> > In github's favor is that it holds the greater mindshare.  Where we
> > to
> > go with it we'd potentially tap into a larger community of
> > developers,
> > which potentially could translate into a greater level of new
> > participation in the project.  github also seems like it's received a
> > greater amount of polish and has some feature advantages (github's CI
> > was seen as a huge pro last time we looked).
> >
> > gitlab is an up-and-comer and is actively acquiring analogous
> > features
> > to github.  A big pro for us is that gitlab is FOSS whereas gitlab is
> > free but proprietary.  With gitlab we'd also hold the option of
> > self-hosting, which might not matter or might be a huge advantage,
> > it's
> > hard to say.
> >
> > Both services provide broadly similar functionality and user
> > experiences.  The differences between them will be small compared
> > with
> > the differences we'll be facing moving from bzr+launchpad.  Also,
> > migration from github to gitlab or vice versa if we change our minds
> > doesn't look like it'd be all that difficult.
> >
> > Those may be the best two options but they're not the only ones we
> > have.  There's other services, and of course git can be used
> > serverside
> > all on its own purely as commandline, or with cgit to provide a
> > minimal
> > web service.
> >
> >
> > -- faqs -----------------------------------------------------------
> > --------
> >
> > Why the need to move from bzr?  One of the reasons why we switched
> > from
> > svn to bzr rather than git was because it was easier to learn; these
> > days so many people know git and don't know bzr (and probably don't
> > care
> > to learn bzr) that this isn't quite such an advantage any more.  git
> > is
> > also more actively maintained than bzr, and has a far bigger
> > ecosystem
> > of tutorials, tools and services.  We also liked the integration
> > between
> > bzr and the LP bug tracker -- we'll lose this, although github/gitlab
> > provide different integration opportunities that might compensate a
> > bit.
> >
> > What services would we move?  What we've discussed in the past is to
> > keep the migration limited to VCS, branch management, and code
> > review.
> > The issue tracking in github/gitlab is quite different from what
> > we've
> > grown accustomed to in LP so changing that might be too much
> > disruption.
> > bzr->git is the main thing we're concerned with; transition of other
> > services can be handled on a case by case basis.
> >
> > How would we undertake the transition?  suv made a good point today
> > that
> > migration of smaller codebases first can be helpful so that the
> > learning
> > curve can be digested in pieces rather than in one big go.  So
> > perhaps
> > we should begin by moving some of our more peripheral bzr repos, then
> > maybe things like the website and then 2geom, and then do inkscape
> > last.
> >
> > What about people who don't yet know git?  I suspect a lot of us
> > either
> > already know git or have been working on learning it, that this isn't
> > an
> > issue.  However, this transition is important enough I'd be willing
> > to
> > propose to the board that we fund book purchases and/or other forms
> > of
> > training for members that might need it.
> >
> > When would the transition be done?  We've done some initial
> > experimentation already.  I would propose as soon as we have a strong
> > consensus for github or gitlab that we proceed with moving the
> > board's
> > repository, inkscape-docs, and any other small / lesser-used
> > repositories still relevant to Inkscape.  Then second in perhaps a
> > few
> > months migrate inkscape-web and 2geom over.  Once those are complete
> > then migrate the inkscape repository itself over, with the goal of
> > having the migration done.  I'd like to see the transition completed
> > prior to when we start getting heavily into the 0.93 release.
> >
> > Let me know your thoughts, and help us drive towards a consensus for
> > github or gitlab.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Bryce
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------
> > -----------
> > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most 
> > engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> > _______________________________________________
> > Inkscape-devel mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors
Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.
With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.
Training and support from Colfax.
Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel
12
Loading...