Re: [Jami] bug report location, process?

[Greg Troxel]

Sébastien Blin <address@hidden> writes:

>> At the sign-in register page
>>
>>    https://git.ring.cx/users/sign_in?redirect_to_referer=yes
>>
>> I see three tabs: SFL / Standard / Register
>
> As Bill said, SFL is for LDAP users from Savoir-Faire Linux, Standard
> is for the others.

Thanks.

>> I don't follow what "SFL" and "Standard" mean.  I'm guessing it is "SFL
>> employees with some id provider from the company" and "everybody else",
>> in which case it seems standard would probably be the default.

> Yes, but I can't easily change that. It's not an option available by
> default. The only instance I know doing that thing uses a hack with
> some sed commands after each updates, and we don't want to do
> that. Should be reported to Gitlab devs.

You might change the text to "SFL employees" and "Registered users", if
that's easy.

>> All of these have a "sign in with" for gitlab and github.  Clicking on
>> gitlab, I get an oauth page:
>>
>>     An application called Ring's Gitlab is requesting access to your GitLab
>>     account. This application was created by Sébastien Blin. Please note
>>     that this application is not provided by GitLab and you should verify
>>     its authenticity before allowing access.
>>
>>     This application will be able to:
>>
>>       Access the authenticated user's API
>>       Grants complete read/write access to the API, including all groups and 
>> projects.
>
> I used this page for creating the OAuth API:
> https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/integration/oauth_provider.html
>
> The gitlab instance is not using OpenID. With just the openid scope,
> you will see "The requested scope is invalid, unknown or malformed"

What surprised me was the scope of access requested.  This is basically
for single sign on, so permission for your gitlab instance to act with
my credentials on all of gitlab does not make sense.  If it's possible
to reduce the requested permissions to "read email address" like with
the github integration, that would be good.

>> The other thing that I'm unclear on is that there seem to be a number of
>> repositories for core and various clients (makes sense), and there are
>> also repos on github, but they seem to be mirrors (why do they exist, if
>> there are git repos on gitlab?).   In particular, I see there's a
>> ring-android-client on the ring.cx gitlab.  But the README at
>>    https://git.ring.cx/savoirfairelinux/ring-project
>> points me to github, which is a mirror, without issues.

> The gitlab instance is just a mirror of gerrit (the official
> repositories). Mirrors are good for a lot of things including:

Sure, I understand the backup usefulness.  And then there's the
confusion.

My problem is that I am having a hard time figuring out
1) the canonical location for each code repository, and

2) more importantly, the place for each repository where issues should
be filed.

It would help if each repo's README at the beginning explained these two
things, and pointers to them were consistently to the canonical
location.

It looks like issues for all components are at:

  https://git.ring.cx/groups/savoirfairelinux/-/issues

with android client issues at

  https://git.ring.cx/savoirfairelinux/ring-client-android/issues

which seems like a view into the same database.


I started down the path of wanting to file a bug about the Android
client.  Perhaps I'm failing to follow things more than most, or being
more persistent about clarity.