User Tools

Site Tools


dev:2017_new_tools

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision
Previous revision
dev:2017_new_tools [2018/02/17 07:14] dyrconadev:2017_new_tools [2023/06/22 09:10] (current) – [Con] dyrcona
Line 20: Line 20:
   * The API is hard to use, particularly for command-line applications   * The API is hard to use, particularly for command-line applications
   * LP has timeout errors rather more often than one would like   * LP has timeout errors rather more often than one would like
-  * No direct links from the bugs to the commits fixing them.+  * No direct links from the bugs to the commits fixing them (or viceversa, i.e a "fix bug 123" commit message links LP123 with that branch).
   * Bug search is limited, even with advanced search.  Most effective way to search is to start opening a new bug.   * Bug search is limited, even with advanced search.  Most effective way to search is to start opening a new bug.
   * There's no way to edit, delete, or suppress a comment, which is a problem if somebody has inadvertently left in patron or a description of a security exploit.   * There's no way to edit, delete, or suppress a comment, which is a problem if somebody has inadvertently left in patron or a description of a security exploit.
   * There's no way to update a bug without triggering an email, which is a problem for batch updates.   * There's no way to update a bug without triggering an email, which is a problem for batch updates.
 +
 +=== Huge list of software options out there OSS or not ===
 +  * https://github.com/Kickball/awesome-selfhosted#project-management
 +
  
 ==== Gitolite ==== ==== Gitolite ====
Line 66: Line 70:
  
   * Ability to report or comment on bugs without requiring a user account   * Ability to report or comment on bugs without requiring a user account
 +  * Better reporting of statistics than is currently available via Launchpad API
  
 ===== Options ===== ===== Options =====
  
 ==== GitHub ==== ==== GitHub ====
 +
 +=== Notes ===
 +
 +Options for transitioning from Launchpad to Github:  https://lp2gh.readthedocs.io/en/latest/moving_issues.html?highlight=import
  
 === Pro === === Pro ===
Line 76: Line 85:
   * Already being used by DIG for gists.   * Already being used by DIG for gists.
   * "Everyone" has a GitHub account.   * "Everyone" has a GitHub account.
 +  * We can create a [[https://github.com/nonprofit|nonprofit organization]] that allows us to have unlimited users and private repositories once our 501c3 status is finalized.
  
 === Con === === Con ===
  
   * Offers no integrated i18n/l10n tools   * Offers no integrated i18n/l10n tools
-  * Private repos are not free (as in beer).+  * <del>Private repos are not free (as in beer).</del>
   * Not F/OSS itself, so we can't host it ourselves if desired.   * Not F/OSS itself, so we can't host it ourselves if desired.
   * [[http://where.coraline.codes/blog/my-year-at-github/|Antisocial Coding: My Year At GitHub]]   * [[http://where.coraline.codes/blog/my-year-at-github/|Antisocial Coding: My Year At GitHub]]
 +  * Will necessitate changes in workflow, particularly as regards working repositories. (This could be a good thing!)
 +  * [[https://www.zdnet.com/article/github-starts-blocking-developers-in-countries-facing-us-trade-sanctions/|GitHub starts blocking developers in countries facing US trade sanctions]]
 +  * [[http://techrights.org/2020/11/03/github-is-social-control/|GitHub is social control]]
 +  * [[https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2022/jun/30/give-up-github-launch/|SFC Gives Up on Github]]
 +  * It is a "bad look" for a F/OSS project to use proprietary hosting solutions.
  
-==== GitLab ====+==== GitLab Community Edition ====
  
 === Pro === === Pro ===
  
-  * F/OSS: We can host it ourselves or host at gitlab.com+  * We can host it ourselves or host at gitlab.com
   * Includes GitLab CI so we could retire both buildbot + current live testing with full Docker-based CI   * Includes GitLab CI so we could retire both buildbot + current live testing with full Docker-based CI
   * Anyone can sign up without administrator intervention.   * Anyone can sign up without administrator intervention.
   * Users can be in groups that can all access the same repos.   * Users can be in groups that can all access the same repos.
   * Has lots of plugins and applications that could add some of the "missing features."   * Has lots of plugins and applications that could add some of the "missing features."
 +  * Can integrate with LDAP for community sign-on.
  
 === Con === === Con ===
Line 101: Line 117:
   * We don't have as much control over branch permissions as gitolite offers. This likely means we'll lose the working repository in favor of individual developer repositories. (Note: gitlab used to be based on gitolite but is no longer.)   * We don't have as much control over branch permissions as gitolite offers. This likely means we'll lose the working repository in favor of individual developer repositories. (Note: gitlab used to be based on gitolite but is no longer.)
   * [[https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/install/requirements.html|Recommends 2 cores and 4GB of RAM for up to 100 users.]] Dyrcona found this to be slow with less than 10 users in testing.   * [[https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/install/requirements.html|Recommends 2 cores and 4GB of RAM for up to 100 users.]] Dyrcona found this to be slow with less than 10 users in testing.
 +  * Anyone with an account can create their own projects/repositories. We're gonna need a lot more disk space.
 +  * To get many of the best features, we would need a license for the Enterprise Edition. (See https://about.gitlab.com/pricing/#self-managed). This would cost the community $6,000/year for 125 users. (That number is based on the number of user keys in the gitolite configuraiton.)
 +  * A self-managed/self-hosted solution would still require some administrator overhead, perhaps as much as gitolite.
 +  * Going with the community edition will necessitate work flow changes, particularly as regards working repositories. (This could be a good thing!)
 +  * Using dual-licensed products with a full feature proprietary release and less powerful free release is a bad look for a F/OSS project.
  
-==== Phabricator ====+==== Fork LP ====
  
 === Pro === === Pro ===
  
-  * Open Source (Apache License 2.0) +  * We could add what we want without fundamentally changing existing workflows on ourselves
-  * More to be determined.+
  
 === Con === === Con ===
  
-  * No hardware recommendations, other than run it on [[https://secure.phabricator.com/book/phabricator/article/installation_guide/|"real computer."]] +  * It would be lot of work
-  * More TBD+
  
-==== Fork LP ====+ 
 +==== GOGS ==== 
 + 
 +https://gogs.io
  
 === Pro === === Pro ===
  
-  * We could add what we want without fundamentally changing existing workflows on ourselves+  * Ridiculously easy to set up 
 +  * GitHub-like features/interface
  
 === Con === === Con ===
  
-  * It would be a lot of work+  * May not be robust enough for bug tracking 
 + 
 + 
 +==== Atlassian Open-Source ==== 
 + 
 +Atlassian products are free for open-source use on application to them: 
 +https://www.atlassian.com/software/views/open-source-license-request 
 +This is used by FOLIO project 
 + 
 +=== Pro === 
 + 
 +  * Very feature rich, JIRA for bug tracking is an industry standard tool 
 +  * Can be self-hosted 
 + 
 +=== Con === 
 + 
 +  * Not open-source 
 + 
 +==== Gerrit ==== 
 + 
 +=== Pro === 
 +=== Con === 
 + 
 + 
 +==== savannah.nongnu.org ==== 
 + 
 +=== Pro === 
 +=== Con === 
  
 ====== Translation tools ====== ====== Translation tools ======
  
 If we move to a bug tracking / repository tool that does not include translation support (and most alternatives do not), then we need to consider what we would like to do for translations. If we move to a bug tracking / repository tool that does not include translation support (and most alternatives do not), then we need to consider what we would like to do for translations.
 +
 +===== POEditor.com =====
 +
 +https://poeditor.com/
  
 ===== Pootle ===== ===== Pootle =====
dev/2017_new_tools.1518869675.txt.gz · Last modified: 2022/02/10 13:34 (external edit)

Except where otherwise noted, content on this wiki is licensed under the following license: CC Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International
CC Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki

© 2008-2022 GPLS and others. Evergreen is open source software, freely licensed under GNU GPLv2 or later.
The Evergreen Project is a U.S. 501(c)3 non-profit organization.