On Wed, 09 Oct 2013 14:25:46 +1000
Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan(a)redhat.com> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 10/09/2013 02:53 AM, Tim Flink wrote:
> If we're OK with non-open tools, Jira [4] is another option. They
> offer free hosted and self-hosted versions of their tools to open
> source projects [5]. Atlassian has been offering this for a long
> time and their tools are used by other open source projects like
> the apache project and jboss. I've not spent much time with Jira
> but have heard more good things than bad things about it.
>
> [4]
https://www.atlassian.com/software/jira [5]
>
https://www.atlassian.com/software/views/open-source-license-request
>
> So after a long novel-disguised-as-an-email, I have two main
> questions:
>
> Where do we want to host code for Taskbot and future QA
> development projects? - fedorahosted? github? bitbucket? I don't
> have a huge preference on the location as long as we're talking
> about git repos, to be honest.
>
> What do we want to use for issue tracking? - This is the bigger
> issue, is there enough interest in phabricator to justify getting
> it working with fas-openid and doing a larger trial? - Do we want
> to explore using JIRA?
>
> Anyhow, thoughts on all this would be very much appreciated.
Given the long and painful process attempting to get GitLab deployed
into Fedora infrastructure, I don't believe it makes sense to consider
a *different* self-hosted option that is neither Trac nor GitLab. You
want to spend your time working on Taskbot, not maintaining Taskbot's
VCS and issue tracking infrastructure.
+1 million on the not spending any more time maintaining a VCS and/or
issue tracking system if we don't have to. It's overhead and headaches
that would be great to avoid.
I don't think of it so much as "avoid doing any tool work" as
"making sure that the efficiency gains we get from a tool are greater
than the time we spend maintaining it". Either way, it's the same
sentiment of being in the getting-stuff-done business not the
farting-around-with-fancy-tools business.
I'm aware of the GitLab initiative but I didn't realize that it was
anywhere close to being ready or a sure thing. My understanding was
that the main problems were that it is a big ball of ruby (mostly
packaged at this point), that it doesn't yet support anonymous
viewing (but I think that's on their roadmap for the next year or so)
and that it's support for pull requests wasn't quite up to github
standards yet. I suppose I should ping infra about all of this to
make sure I'm not missing something.
What I want is:
- easy/workable code review
- good issue tracking
* one issue tracker for the entire project preferred
* be able to track things like infra and investigation tasks
- almost everything use the same auth (prefer FAS, github/bitbucket
would be an option)
- not need to have someone always working on maintaining stuff
Ideally all of it would be open source but I'm not sure I want to push
for anything to be added as a fedorahosted option - that's a lot more
work than I really want to be taking on right now. We have enough on
our plate as it is.
In terms of your hosted options, it may be worth looking at
RhodeCode
Hosted, since that's a lot closer to normal open source than JIRA.
However, that would have the same doesn't-integrate-with-FAS problem
as other hosted alternatives.
I tried out RhodeCode a few months ago before they had the enterprise
support like they do now. I had so many problems with it that I
switched over to gitolite+cgit which has fewer features but
supports ssh keys and didn't crash on a daily basis.
It may be worth looking at again, though since we're likely to need
some VCS management at some point for the task repos. I had been
planning to use some variation of the fedorahosted setup (either repos
in fedorahosted or a clone - haven't talked to infra about this yet)
One of the nice things about the RhodeCode hosted option though, in
that where GitHub and BitBucket give you repos within a single large
shared system, RhodeCode gives you your own self-contained server.
This means a bit more work to get it set up, but also gives you more
flexibility in terms of issue management.
Yeah, one of the classic choices: flexibility or
lack-of-required-effort :)
You all are using gerrit, right? Have you been happy with it WRT
features, maintenance etc? I've been getting the impression that there
are a lot of people who aren't thrilled with it but I've not actually
tried to use it myself.
Thanks so much for your input, I really appreciate it.
Tim
Cheers,
Nick.
- --
Nick Coghlan
Red Hat Infrastructure Engineering & Development, Brisbane
Testing Solutions Team Lead
Beaker Development Lead (
http://beaker-project.org/)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird -
http://www.enigmail.net/
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSVNrKAAoJEHEkJo9fMO/LfwIH/A8Q32oK++JBZRSNUR/4MICw
/A7mjeZHwSYYgG+/2qJt6PzfRxY1UiW8bXus00wEcI56kuqQgP66Tk+INH2+5uVN
N9g1BQVW18bWjR6U0tanceNQO2gp2hfUByPIeaSjVPwI5JlKoRUzmCBp/agZo3lT
V7AJYWMXXDTinD4NXr4kbtA9YiKyvKbzWqPuzS2IPsSiyVY6fXHy8eU71/25z/k+
EX1k0WA585zCSb+VKlmp1SRcMnFXwt6irDfy9U6XFCJGqiHE/Dg2Rl0bk8GHHxL8
3QWQT4H/crp3grri4YxYNMHyJSuGYZd/c+7jMUGJN2q11KNGLvTYTVlU+08WgdM=
=Lt3K
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
qa-devel mailing list
qa-devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/qa-devel