The last time I evaluated GitLab, you needed the paid version to use features that I considered pretty basic, like merge request approvals and multiple code reviewers[1]. I'm wondering now if the GNOME people consider these unnecessary, or if I misunderstood what was possible with self hosting.
Gnome has moved to GitLab
171–180 of 212 posts
Re: Gnome has moved to GitLab
#172it feels so slow to browse anything on this gitlab...
Re: Gnome has moved to GitLab
#173Earlier quoted context omitted.
Intentional or not... you pretty much agree with jwz: https://anonym.to/?https://www.jwz.org/doc/cadt.html ( https://www.jwz.org/doc/cadt.html - jwz has some nasty opinion about hn visitors - so the first link omits the referer)
It did not omit the referrer for me.
This might help in the future if you use Firefox: https://feeding.cloud.geek.nz/posts/tweaking-referrer-for-pr...
A quite safe value from there is
network.http.referer.XOriginPolicy = 1
Re: Gnome has moved to GitLab
#174The last time I evaluated GitLab, you needed the paid version to use features that I considered pretty basic, like merge request approvals and multiple code reviewers[1]. I'm wondering now if the GNOME people consider these unnecessary, or if I misunderstood what was possible with self hosting. [1] https://about.gitlab.com/pricing/
I wonder about the exact same thing. Some time ago I compared the features of GitLab with similar solutions and found that the OSS version is pretty limited. If you want all the nice features for big projects it is more expansive than the Atlassian stack.
Re: Gnome has moved to GitLab
#175Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What's the relationship between the existence of a bug in the codebase and the propensity of the bug reporter to respond to an email? It's not clear to me the question here, can you be more specific? Many bugs filed are not necessarily bugs in the codebase. I do wish we treated bugs and user support separately. I rather prefer the terseness of an engineering journal for what it is, but that tends to anger those exp…
> In Bugzilla, the only real option we had was "Closed: WONTFIX/NOTABUG" which almost always resulted in hurt feelings on the part of the bug reporter. > I think the gitlab tooling allows us to be more diplomatic in closing bugs that are out-of-scope or not aligned with the goals of the project at large. Can you give more details about this? Closing is closing and Bugzilla allows you to name your statuses whatever yo…
My mistake, it was 5 years for projects that did trim. Most projects brought all bugs over afaik.
Re: Gnome has moved to GitLab
#176Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everyone on the CC list for each bugzilla bug was notified 6 months ago that any bug without action in over a year would be frozen instead of migrated. (Do keep in mind that GNOME, unlike corporate projects, is largely volunteer based and time, resources, and contributors are limited) As the email said, you just needed to ACK a comment on the bug to keep it alive and ensure its migration. Given the nearly 900,000 bug…
Intentional or not... you pretty much agree with jwz: https://anonym.to/?https://www.jwz.org/doc/cadt.html ( https://www.jwz.org/doc/cadt.html - jwz has some nasty opinion about hn visitors - so the first link omits the referer)
> jwz has some nasty opinion about hn visitors - so the first link omits the referer
I prefer to just not go. If he doesn't want the likes of me there then I'm happy not to waste effort trying to pay attention to whatever it is he is saying.
Re: Gnome has moved to GitLab
#177Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everyone on the CC list for each bugzilla bug was notified 6 months ago that any bug without action in over a year would be frozen instead of migrated. (Do keep in mind that GNOME, unlike corporate projects, is largely volunteer based and time, resources, and contributors are limited) As the email said, you just needed to ACK a comment on the bug to keep it alive and ensure its migration. Given the nearly 900,000 bug…
I wish it was that simple, but I never received a single notice of the migration or my need to do anything at all as a bug reporter. (Just ran a liberal grep on my inbox right now.) The only notice I received was after-the-fact. Sorry. Learning of GNOME'S cavalier attitude toward user reports and eventual product direction was exactly why I moved off the platform in the intervening years. I had high hopes when I was…
Link for Jwz's cadt post
https://www.jwz.org/doc/cadt.html
(edit: I didn't see it was already posted below)
Re: Gnome has moved to GitLab
#178Earlier quoted context omitted.
jwz links don't work from Hacker News. They will get redirected.
This will work: http://nullrefer.com/?https://www.jwz.org/doc/cadt.html
Though as with sites that refuse entry if I have the adblocker active, I'll take the "if I'm not wanted, I just won't go" option. I doubt I'm missing anything life changing that I can't get elsewhere.
Re: Gnome has moved to GitLab
#179If only all of the energy spent on Gnome bashing would be spent on bugfixing, we'd have a perfect Gnome desktop by now. It's sad.
While I agree that excessive GNOME-bashing is unhealthy, one of the problems the critics of GNOME (disclaimer: including me!) have is that GNOME frequently rejects submitted, complete patches, so unfortunately your argument doesn't hold.
GNOME-supporters will probably reply to this that the (main?) reason such patches are rejected is that they go against GNOME's design vision, which is sort-of fair enough, but then conversely, why would you expect people who have different preferences to work on implementing GNOME's vision, which they don't agree with.
Fortunately, there are projects like MATE or Cinnamon which give an outlet for the people who dislike the turn GNOME has taken.
Re: Gnome has moved to GitLab
#180Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not like gnome was utilizing bugzilla anyways. They had one bug that was 11 years old.
The current bug tracker has 40 pages worth of bugs that are more than 11 years old. The oldest one is an 18 year old GIMP bug.
> The current bug tracker has 40 pages worth of bugs that are more than 11 years old.
No, it does't. The bug tracker might list over 40 pages of reports that were filed over 11 years ago, but that doesn't mean each entry represents a an actual bug.