<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div>So, I am furiously scrolling through email messages to try and confirm it was Jan who suggested we articulate needs and goals before any change. +1 on that idea. It is good practice. </div><div><br></div><div>I realizing how god awful email is to catch up and understand any discussion you are not following in real time. </div><div><br></div><div>GitHub issues, like most web based discussion UIs, handle threading and quoting much better than email. That is a giant +1 if you want drive expanded the community and increase use. </div><div><br></div><div>Finally, FWIW, I think redundancy is important. Having the repo at both repos has an upside. </div><div><br></div><div>Greg</div><div><br><br>Greg Elin<div>P: 917-304-3488</div><div>E: <a href="mailto:gregelin@gitmachines.com">gregelin@gitmachines.com</a></div><div><br></div><div>Sent from my iPhone</div></div><div><br>On Apr 9, 2014, at 9:08 AM, Trevor Vaughan <<a href="mailto:tvaughan@onyxpoint.com">tvaughan@onyxpoint.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div>Absolutely!<br><br></div>So, patch reviews are made easier by the following:<br><br></div><div>GitHub<br><br></div>1) Syntax highlighting<br>
</div>2) Inline commenting that persists over time<br></div>3) Immediate tracing of tickets to code via hashtags<br></div>4) Notification of individuals and groups via directed responses (@)<br></div><div>5) Easy raw file downloads<br>
</div><div><br></div>Gerrit<br><br></div>1) Syntax highlighting<br></div>2) Inline commenting that persists over time<br></div>3) Forced clean history based on Gerrit rules<br></div>4) Complete tracking of revision history (GitHub doesn't give you this)<br>
</div>5) Ability to restore abandoned changes if necessary<br></div>6) Authoritative, uncorruptable (unless you allow direct pushing) repository.<br><br></div>If I remember correctly, FedoraHosted will not use any product not packaged with RHEL/Fedora and Gerrit proved to be too difficult to package for whatever reason.<br>
<br></div>There is another Gerrit-like system that the FedoraHosted systems can use but I didn't find it to be as powerful as Gerrit when I last tried to use it.<br><br></div>Thanks,<br><br>Trevor<br></div><div class="gmail_extra">
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 6:05 AM, Jan Lieskovsky <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jlieskov@redhat.com" target="_blank">jlieskov@redhat.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Hello Trevor,<br>
<div class=""><br>
----- Original Message -----<br>
> From: "Trevor Vaughan"<br>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 9, 2014 2:12:52 AM<br>
><br>
> Honestly +1 here.<br>
><br>
> I have pretty much all of my repos hosted under Github and their patch and<br>
> review process is *easy*<br>
<br>
</div>Can you be more specific what makes that patch review process easy? Anything<br>
else behind having the patch review handled via Gerrit?<br>
<div class=""><br>
> particularly when combined with the new Gerrit<br>
> system that's free for FOSS projects.<br>
<br>
</div>So would just request Gerrit instance for SSG project via the Fedora infrastructure<br>
solve our obstacles? [*]<br>
<div class=""><br>
Thank you && Regards, Jan.<br>
--<br>
Jan iankko Lieskovsky / Red Hat Security Technologies Team<br>
<br>
</div>[*] You to understand I am not against moving to GitHub. Just trying to identify<br>
the difference / advantages / improvements, and if some of them would be<br>
doable without the move to GitHub (less requirements for the time / resources<br>
wrt to actions related with the move)<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
><br>
> Trevor<br>
><br>
><br>
> On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Ronald < <a href="mailto:mini.pelle@gmail.com">mini.pelle@gmail.com</a> > wrote:<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Hi there,<br>
><br>
> from a personal perspective, as a github users (read biased opinion), I've<br>
> been refrained from contributing and publishing diffs because:<br>
> - the process of patch approval was not clear,<br>
> - communication around a patch is made difficult by mail (which are already<br>
> follinwg throughout the days)<br>
> - current open issues are not listed and cannot be discussed by the community<br>
> (to propose patch for instance)<br>
><br>
> I have the feeling that a move to github would make lots of things clear for<br>
> global collaboration. Although, the fact that the project is hosted at<br>
> fedora is a good quality stamp/branding :)<br>
><br>
> my two cents.<br>
><br>
> Ronald<br>
><br>
><br>
> On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 7:53 PM, Shawn Wells < <a href="mailto:shawn@redhat.com">shawn@redhat.com</a> > wrote:<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> On 4/8/14, 10:16 AM, Trevor Vaughan wrote:<br>
><br>
><br>
> Just out of curiosity, what happened with this in the end?<br>
><br>
> I just noticed a few more suggestions that Github-style pull requests would<br>
> be really useful.<br>
><br>
> There were valid opinions expressed for both staying on FedoraHosted and<br>
> migrating to GitHub. So, effectively, a stalemate.<br>
><br>
> The SSG community has grown amazingly -- both in contributors and usage --<br>
> and because of this success Red Hat is preparing to ship SSG in future<br>
> versions of RHEL [1]. This exacerbates the need for a manageable ticketing<br>
> system with easy patch submission as very shortly every RHEL installation<br>
> will have a copy of SSG. FedoraHosted simply wasn't designed to include the<br>
> same tooling and developer ecosystem as afforded on GitHub (and that's NOT a<br>
> ding against it's designers!).<br>
><br>
> The community is a coalition of the willing. Our shared purpose drives the<br>
> community, and I strongly feel the need to build out tools that will allow<br>
> us to scale. I'm concerned -- likely overly so -- at how to prepare for a<br>
> wave of interest once we begin shipping in RHEL.<br>
><br>
> With that said, who am I to *mandate* the migration to GitHub? Admittedly<br>
> part of me wants to just go ahead and do it, however that could come at<br>
> making a non-trivial amount of people (esp. committers, who would be<br>
> effected by the change) feel alienated/ignored. Certainly we can't make<br>
> everyone happy all the time, though.<br>
><br>
> Thoughts would be *most* welcome.<br>
><br>
><br>
> [1] <a href="https://bugzilla.redhat.com/" target="_blank">https://bugzilla.redhat.com/</a> show_bug.cgi?id=1038655<br>
><br>
><br>
</div></div><div class="im HOEnZb">> ______________________________ _________________<br>
> scap-security-guide mailing list<br>
> scap-security-guide@lists. <a href="http://fedorahosted.org" target="_blank">fedorahosted.org</a><br>
> <a href="https://lists.fedorahosted" target="_blank">https://lists.fedorahosted</a>. org/mailman/listinfo/scap- security-guide<br>
><br>
><br>
</div><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">> _______________________________________________<br>
> scap-security-guide mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:scap-security-guide@lists.fedorahosted.org">scap-security-guide@lists.fedorahosted.org</a><br>
> <a href="https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/scap-security-guide" target="_blank">https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/scap-security-guide</a><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> --<br>
> Trevor Vaughan<br>
> Vice President, Onyx Point, Inc<br>
> <a href="tel:%28410%29%20541-6699" value="+14105416699">(410) 541-6699</a><br>
> <a href="mailto:tvaughan@onyxpoint.com">tvaughan@onyxpoint.com</a><br>
><br>
> -- This account not approved for unencrypted proprietary information --<br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> scap-security-guide mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:scap-security-guide@lists.fedorahosted.org">scap-security-guide@lists.fedorahosted.org</a><br>
> <a href="https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/scap-security-guide" target="_blank">https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/scap-security-guide</a><br>
><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Trevor Vaughan<br>Vice President, Onyx Point, Inc<br>(410) 541-6699<br><a href="mailto:tvaughan@onyxpoint.com">tvaughan@onyxpoint.com</a><br><br>-- This account not approved for unencrypted proprietary information --
</div>
</div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>_______________________________________________</span><br><span>scap-security-guide mailing list</span><br><span><a href="mailto:scap-security-guide@lists.fedorahosted.org">scap-security-guide@lists.fedorahosted.org</a></span><br><span><a href="https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/scap-security-guide">https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/scap-security-guide</a></span><br></div></blockquote></body></html>