Hi Dan, On 22 August 2018 at 12:44, Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch> wrote: > Hi all, > > I think it's time to brainstorm a bit about the gitlab migration. Basic reasons: > > - fd.o admins want to deprecate shell accounts and hand-rolled > infrastructure, because it's a pain to keep secure&updated. > > - gitlab will allow us to add committers on our own, greatly > simplifying that process (and offloading that task from fd.o admins). > Random thought - I really wish the admins spoke early and louder about issues. >From infra to manpower and adhoc tool maintenance. > There's also some more benefits we might want to reap, like better CI > integration for basic build testing - no more "oops didn't build > drm-misc defconfigs" or "sry, forgot make check in maintainer-tools". > But that's all fully optional. > > For the full in-depth writeup of everything, see > > https://www.fooishbar.org/blog/gitlab-fdo-introduction/ > > I think now is also a good time, with mesa, xorg, wayland/weston and > others moved, to start thinking about how we'll move drm. There's a > few things to figure out though: > > - We probably want to split out maintainer-tools. That would address > the concern that there's 50+ committers to an auto-updating shell > script ... > > - We need to figure out how to handle the ACL trickery around drm-tip in gitlab. > > - Probably good to stage the migration, with maintainer-tools, igt > leading. That will also make fd.o admins happy, who want to rework > their cloud infrastructure a bit before migrating the big kernel repos > over. > > - Figuring out the actual migration - we've been adding a pile of > committers since fd.o LDAP was converted to gitlab once back in > spring. We need to at least figure out how to move the new > accounts/committers. > As a observer, allow me to put some ideas. You've mostly covered them all, my emphasis is to seriously stick with _one_ thing at a time. Attempting to do multiple things in parallel will end up with sub-optimal results. - (at random point) cleanup the committers list - people who have not contributed in the last 1 year? - setup drm group, copy/migrate accounts - one could even reuse the existing credentials - move git repos to gitlab, the push URL change, cgit mirror preserves the normal fetch ones as well as PW hooks - work out how new accounts are handled - still in bugzilla, otherwise At this stage only workflow change is a) once-off account setup and b) pushURL update As a follow-up one can setup anything fancy. - migrate PW/other hooks - migrate bugs - if applicable - add new hooks - DRM docs, other - etc > - Similar, maintainer-tools needs to move. We probably want to move > all the dim maintained kernel repos in one go, to avoid headaches with > double-accounts needed for committers. > One should be able to create a separate repo for these. And then either: - one by one add the required features into the gitlab MR machinery, - or, wire the execution in pre/post merge stage. IIRC there are some upstream requests about the former. > - CI, linux-next and everyone else should be fine, since the > cgit/non-ssh paths will keep working (they'll be read-only mirrors). > Need to double-check that with everyone. > > - Some organization structure would be good. > > https://cgit.freedesktop.org/drm > > libdrm won't be part of the gitlab drm group because that's already > moved under mesa (and you can't symlink/mulit-home anymore on gitlab): > > https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/mesa/drm > > But there's also drm_hwcomposer, which we might want to migrate into > drm too - gitlab requires a containing group, and > drm_hwcomposer/drm_hwcomposer is a bit silly. > It did strike me a lot when drm_hwcomposer/drm_hwcomposer was introduced. Fortunately moving repos in gitlab is reasonably pain-free HTH Emil
