Re: Gitlab Evaluation & Migration
- Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2019 20:31:41 +0100
- From: Martin Flöser <mgraesslin@xxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Gitlab Evaluation & Migration
Am 2019-02-23 10:44, schrieb Ben Cooksley:
Based on all of the above we'd like to propose migrating towards
I'm totally honest here: I'm not happy about yet another migration. This
will be the fifth reviewing toolkit I use for KDE (reviewboard for svn,
reviewboard for git, gerrit, phabricator and now gitlab). Each of the
transitions was painful for everyone involved and the commit rate to the
project I was involved suffered from the transitions. As an example for
the problems: KWin's hacking document still mentions reviewboard:
I'm not pleased that we want to transit to another solution after just a
few years. I understand that there is the feeling that our phabricator
solution limits contributions from newcomers. I don't believe that and
are afraid of the long term developers walking away due to the changes
(which is something I saw with every transition). I don't know whether I
will continue to contribute if I have to relearn the tooling - my time
for KDE is currently very limited. If I have an hour to hack and have to
spend half the time on how to contribute now, that sucks and lowers
Changing the tooling will not solve any of the contribution problems.
Instead we introduce new ones like all documentation going out of life.
Please consider whether the advantages are really worth it.