On Fri, 24 Jan 2014 06:56:52 -0500 (EST)
Kamil Paral <kparal(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> I'd really like to put this discussion to bed
OK, so the simplest approach I see here is:
* Leave all repos at Bitbucket.
* Let the git support in Phab mature a bit (maybe they'll fix
annoyances like using callsigns for repo names). Resolve public
We should probably ask if they intend to leave things that way or if it
will change. I suspect that it's not going to change since git hosting
support was done a month ago.
Https hosting is technically working, git just thows a fit because the
SSL cert on qadevel-stg is self signed.
* Don't change anything at least as long as we don't have FAS
in Phab. Until then, it doesn't really matter whether we manage
commit permission using Bitbucket accounts or Phab accounts.
I'm not sure that FAS matters much here. Even after we get FAS
integration, there's not going to be any support for FAS groups in
phabricator. AFAIK, phabricator doesn't support externally defined
groups and even if it did, we'd have no way of getting that data since
Persona doesn't have a mechanism to do anything other than auth.
* Once there is FAS support and improved git support in Phab,
whether we want to move the repos, so that we have everything in a
single location (and mirror back to Bitbucket, if we want).
Sure, I'm not in a huge hurry to move everything over. We have bigger
fish to fry at the moment :)
If this sounds reasonable, I'll probably move
to bitbucket as
well, so that we start to get rid of fedorahosted and move all code
into a single place.
If we're going to hold off on migration for everything elase, I'm
inclined to wait a bit on that. I'd prefer to avoid moving stuff twice
when commit privileges etc. are setup and functioning for the
fedorahosted repos right now.