Information regarding upcoming Gitlab Migration

[Nicolás Alvarez]

> El 29 abr. 2020, a la(s) 11:19, Boudewijn Rempt <boud at valdyas.org> escribió:
> 
> On woensdag 29 april 2020 15:16:12 CEST Adriaan de Groot wrote:
>>> On 2020 prilula d. 29id 06:46:55 CEST Bhushan Shah wrote:
>>> We have gotten a request for namespacing from projects on multiple
>>> occassion, in cgit our workaround has always been that we prefix the
>>> repo name with namespace- (i.e wikitolearn-courses-backend).
>>> 
>>> While this works out with our current workflow, it is not really
>>> optimal. I've also mentioned various new contributor focused
>>> requirements which lead us to this proposal for structuring in previous
>>> emails.
>> 
>> 
>> Your mention of namespaces reminds me that there was **also** a discussion in 
>> this thread about workboards and reviews.
>> 
>> GitLab can have **one** workboard per group. So depending on how the 
>> categories / namespaces work out, we have choices in the overall number of 
>> workboards:
>> 
>> - one big one (flat)
>> - one per (sub)group / namespace
>> 
>> We should look at this as well. Arguments I've seen in this thread
>> 
>> - one big one is unmanageably large
>> - (sub)communities have asked for smaller (split) workboards
>> - split workboards make it harder to work over group boundaries
>> - one big one allows moving reviews and tasks to where they belong
> 
> Outch, that's a nasty one. I thought there was a workboard per repository... And most of the proposed groups actually aren't really subcommunities in any case, just bags of holding for vaguely similar projects.

My understanding is that there is a workboard per repository *and* another per group.

Now, how big do we make the group workboard? All of KDE? A smaller category? That is the question.

-- 
Nicolas