Re: [igt-dev] RFC: Migration to Gitlab

From: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
To: Daniel Stone <daniel-rLtY4a/8tF1rovVCs/uTlw@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Jani Nikula <jani.nikula-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org>,
	"DRM maintainer tools announcements, discussion,
	and development"
	<dim-tools-PD4FTy7X32lNgt0PjOBp9y5qC8QIuHrW@public.gmane.org>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter-/w4YWyX8dFk@public.gmane.org>,
	intel-gfx
	<intel-gfx-PD4FTy7X32lNgt0PjOBp9y5qC8QIuHrW@public.gmane.org>,
	amd-gfx mailing list
	<amd-gfx-PD4FTy7X32lNgt0PjOBp9y5qC8QIuHrW@public.gmane.org>,
	igt-dev-PD4FTy7X32lNgt0PjOBp9y5qC8QIuHrW@public.gmane.org,
	ajax <ajax-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
	dri-devel
	<dri-devel-PD4FTy7X32lNgt0PjOBp9y5qC8QIuHrW@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [igt-dev] RFC: Migration to Gitlab
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2018 10:01:37 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180822170137.GG2340@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPj87rNH+rLZexK3QoqzeBLZPr5QYtAz187NbKN5JUFnzxoxHg-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>

On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 05:37:22PM +0100, Daniel Stone wrote:
> Hi Rodrigo,
> 
> On Wed, 22 Aug 2018 at 17:06, Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@intel.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 10:19:19AM -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2018-08-22 at 16:13 +0300, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > > > - Sticking to fdo bugzilla and disabling gitlab issues for at least
> > > >   drm-intel for the time being. Doing that migration in the same go is a
> > > >   bit much I think. Reassignment across bugzilla and gitlab will be an
> > > >   issue.
> > >
> > > Can you elaborate a bit on the issues here? The actual move-the-bugs
> > > process has been pretty painless for the parts of xorg we've done so
> > > far.
> >
> > I guess there is nothing against moving the bugs there. The concern is only on
> > doing everything at once.
> >
> > I'm in favor of moving gits for now and after we are confident that
> > everything is there and working we move the bugs.
> 
> As Daniel alluded to, the only issue I really have is moving _all_ the
> kernel repos at once. At the end of the year we'll have easy automatic
> scaling thanks to the independent services being separated. As it is,
> all the GitLab services (apart from CI runners) run on a single
> machine, so we have limited options if it becomes overwhelmed with
> load.
> 
> Do you have a particular concern about the repos?

no concerns from my side about the repos itself. From my committer
perspective on libdrm, mesa the migration was really smooth.

> e.g. what would you
> check for to make sure things are 'there and working'?

more in terms of other committers getting used to it, dim working
for most of committers, links in documentations and wikis updated...

but no concerns with the infra itself.

> 
> > One question about the bugzilla:
> >
> > Will all the referrences on all commit messages get outdated after
> > bugzilla is dead?
> > Or bugzilla will stay up for referrence but closed for interaction?
> > or all old closed stuff are always moved and bugzilla.fd.o as well and
> > bugzilla.fd.o will be mirroring gitlab?
> 
> When bugs are migrated from Bugzilla to GitLab, only open bugs are
> migrated. Closed ones are left in place, as is; open ones have a
> comment at the end saying that the bug has moved to GitLab, a URL
> linking to the new GitLab issue, and telling them to please chase it
> up there.
> 
> Even when we move everyone completely off Bugzilla, we will keep it as
> a read-only mirror forever. Even with Phabricator, which very few
> people ever used, has had all its bugs and code review captured and
> archived, so we can continue to preserve all the old content and
> links, without having to run the actual service.

Great!
Thanks for all clarification,
Rodrigo.

> 
> Cheers,
> Daniel
_______________________________________________
amd-gfx mailing list
amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx