Open Stack

On Mon, 2020-09-14 at 12:43 +0100, Sean Mooney wrote:
> On Mon, 2020-09-14 at 13:31 +0200, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> > On 9/14/20 10:17 AM, Gaël THEROND wrote:
> > > Hi everyone,
> > > 
> > > So, thomas, your message was rude and can hurt because Yocto didn’t
> > > suggested to use those tools, he was answering you that he feel the pain
> > > as everyone is suggesting those tool when you talk with people on IRC etc.
> > 
> > Sorry if it was perceived as rude. Though IMO Yocto *was* suggesting
> > these tools, at least that's my perception in his message.
> > 
> > > Even if I do understand your point and know the importance of being
> > > autonomous and do not rely on non-FLOSS software, the thruth being all
> > > those discussions is the pain in the ass that it is to contribute to
> > > Openstack projects compared with other Open source software based on
> > > Github or Github like workflow.
> > 
> > If it's harder to contribute to OpenStack, IMO, it's not because of the
> > tooling (ie: gerrit + git-review), but because the bar for patch quality
> > is set much higher. Otherwise, I did find the git-review workflow much
> > nicer than the one of Gitlab / Github.
> 
> +1 both to the code quality bar esspically in more mature project and the ux
> of git review. i have shown it to friend that use gerrit but dont work on openstack
> and they were really happy with it.
> > 
> > > The opensource community and especially the Openstack one need to
> > > understand that people really get a limited amount of time and so if you
> > > want to attract more people your contribution process have to be
> > > streamlined and on par with what most of us developers do experience on
> > > everyday.
> > 
> > I very much agree that getting a patch accepted isn't easy. I gave up
> > about some patches because core reviewer were asking for too much work
> > that I cannot unfortunately provide (I understand why they do that
> > though). Though this never was because of the infrastructure, which I
> > find much nicer than any other.
> 
> ya the new contributor bar for some porject is kindo like learning emacs
> it can be pretty much vertical at times but i do know that we try to help
> new and old contributors leap over that hurdel too. i think we do a better
> job of that then we used too but it can be intimidating. for the first year
> year and a hafl of working on openstack i did not understand the importance
> of irc and keeping an eye on the mailing list even if i did not post.
> 
> as a result i tried to land thing purely via gerrit and unsruprissingly
> that did not go well until i started talking to people on irc/email so
> i could socialise my proposals and get feedback more directly.
> > 
> > > We want a fully floss project to host it? Fine it’s perfectly valid
> > > argument, then just reuse what’s already there with gitea and redirect
> > > development effort of the abandonned software to the new platform in
> > > order to support the missing part if ever required!
> > 
> > This is IMO a much nicer idea than suggesting to go back to Launchpad,
> > or stop migrating to Storyboard.
> 
> ya i do think looking at gitia has a lot of merit.
> its even somthing i would be happy to bring up with the nova team who
> previous had decided to never move from lanuchpad. i was also apposed
> to moveing nova or os-vif from lanuchpad to storyborad after trying to use
> it for a bit but this would be something i would be tempted to at least
> try.

hum one gap that could be a blocker for gitea is the lack fo confidential issue support

https://docs.gitea.io/en-us/comparison/#issue-tracker
unless https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/issues/3217 is adressed we would not be able to use it
for security bugs so that i think would be a blocker.

it looks like its in flight 
https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea/pull/11099
https://github.com/php-tuf/php-tuf/issues/25
https://github.com/isaacs/github/issues/37

but that would be a requirement for any issue tracker we use so we can track security bugs privetly.

> > 
> > Cheers,
> > 
> > Thomas Goirand (zigo)
> > 
> 
>