[kde-community] Official KDE mirror on github

[Jaroslaw Staniek]

On 18 September 2015 at 14:17, Ben Cooksley <bcooksley at kde.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 12:14 AM, Jaroslaw Staniek <staniek at kde.org> wrote:
>> On 18 September 2015 at 14:00, Ben Cooksley <bcooksley at kde.org> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 11:54 PM, Jaroslaw Staniek <staniek at kde.org> wrote:
>>>> On 18 September 2015 at 13:42, Boudhayan Gupta <bgupta at kde.org> wrote:
>>>>> Ladies and gentlemen, as you read this mail github.com/kde is being
>>>>> populated by the initial sync of all repositories.
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe someone should make a public announcement?
>>>>>
>>>>> Shout out to Ben, he truly is a superhero.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks a lot!
>>>> Is it possible to enable Issues support for a given project? (as I
>>>> said needed by the bountysource infra at least)
>>>
>>> From what I saw of the above consensus, issues and pull requests would
>>> be disabled as those should go through our usual infrastructure
>>> (todo.kde.org / bugs.kde.org / reviewboard.kde.org) - if there is a
>>> post otherwise i'd be happy to be pointed to it though?
>>
>> I see what you mean but there was no discussion about this matter in
>> this thread at least.
>>
>> For code I maintain I welcome:
>> - any form of patches even if they come via pull requests, just like
>> for me emailed patches are also better than no patches
>> - any form of donations for features -> for that Issues are needed
>>
>> It's possible to fork these mirrors to get this support and I am doing
>> this now for a test in case of kreport.git.
>> https://github.com/staniek/kreport-1
>>
>> But again, please consider this as less controlled/predictable
>> activity - that forking will happen anyway, as this is the value of
>> github-based collaboration, and (IMHO) sense of our existence on
>> github.
>
> The decision isn't mine, it's the community's decision.

I know :)

> I've already
> added a note suggesting people submit patches on Reviewboard.
>

Don't we slowly drop support for Reviewboard?
(even I am still not sure how to correctly update phabricator diff
from command line)

> For a decision on those two points, i'd welcome pointers to where that
> was made in the above thread - or the opening of a new thread on those
> topics.

@all

I think this is still the very same thread "KDE mirrored on github".

1. A friendly bot is a good idea. Friendly i.e. not saying that
"you're doing bad thing using github".
But if I was external contributor I'd find rejecting my carefully
crafted patch rather offensive. Couldn't the link to the patch be sent
by email to a right mailing list?

2. Regarding the issues/pull requests - nobody agreed/disagreed to my proposal.
Is anyone against an *opt-in* possibility of enabling Issues and/or
Pull Requests for a given mirrored repo? Opt-in by maintainer of the
patches. We can easily draft a policy if someone is afraid.

Until we have "free" bountysource-like infra, I do need github Issues.
I also work with bountysource so they find a way to better support
bugs.kde.org; for now one can paste the url and it works but issues
"for adoption" are not listed.

Thanks again!

PS: Also I think that I don't spend time on projects to educate people
that they shouldn't use github. I am not competing in github's
businesses.

-- 
regards, Jaroslaw Staniek

KDE:
: A world-wide network of software engineers, artists, writers, translators
: and facilitators committed to Free Software development - http://kde.org
Calligra Suite:
: A graphic art and office suite - http://calligra.org
Kexi:
: A visual database apps builder - http://calligra.org/kexi
Qt Certified Specialist:
: http://www.linkedin.com/in/jstaniek