Re: migrating to GitLab

[Jonas Hahnfeld]

Am Freitag, den 08.05.2020, 11:03 +0200 schrieb Valentin Villenave:
> On 5/8/20, Jonas Hahnfeld <address@hidden> wrote:
> > 3) The idea is to have the "main" repository at GitLab, next to the
> > issues and merge requests.
> 
> If the two are kept in sync (if and when you enable mirroring), does
> that mean some of us can keep pushing onto Savannah without any
> difference whatsoever?

The mirroring is directional, in our case from GitLab to Savannah, so
no real synchronization.

> (Except perhaps for the few minutes time-lag it’d take for commits to 
> propagate.)

This is exactly the problem, for example with conflicting commits in
the two master branches. I don't think we should risk this, the GitLab
documentation explicitly states "Bidirectional mirroring may cause
conflicts".
What we could do is mirror a subset of the dev branches from Savannah
to GitLab. Not sure how this could be used, but this would need a
really compelling reason to warrant the complexity.

> > Ultimately we can talk about cleaning up the Savannah repo and only
> > keeping the "important" branches there.
> 
> Counterpoint: unlike GitLab, Savannah 1/ has been around for a long
> time and 2/ relies on a non-profit foundation with lots of volunteers
> (although its resources are obviously stretched thin). This leads me
> to believe (perhaps superstitiously) that Savannah may have a
> marginally better chance of staying around for longer than GitLab;
> thus removing "historical" branches from Savannah may come to bite us
> in the ass in decades to come, in case GitLab goes suddenly bankrupt
> or decides to cease Free-Software support or whatever.

Granted, but how likely is it that a dev branch from 10 years ago will
be of interest in a decade or so?
In any case, we can export the project from gitlab.com to prevent loss
if that is of concern.

Jonas

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part