On 2017-11-19 20:11, Jerome Leclanche wrote: > I've refrained from commenting on this topic because I don't want to > sound ungrateful people are taking the time to work on a fairly > extensive migration off flyspray, but I'm not looking forward to > Bugzilla (and I've contributed to a lot of Bugzilla-based projects in > the past). It has the same mindset as Jira, making filing an issue a > similar endeavour as filing taxes and creating artificial meta-work > for both users and triagers. > I strongly agree something like Gogs or Gitlab would be a much better > path forward. Especially if, as Jelle was initially saying, the goal > is for it to be "extended to our wishes". > Furthermore, Gitlab has native support for federated login which we > seriously could start using. Separate logins for bug tracker, BBS AUR, > wiki, archweb and all the mailing lists is... eh. > > J. Leclanche > This is example of wishful thinking and misunderstanding what our requirements are. Reporting anything on Bugzilla isn't different from using Flyspray, and we're far from "the most friendly distribution of the year" title anyway. Neither Gogs or Gitlab are primarily issue trackers and I hope you noticed that we're not discussing integrated code hosting solution. Calling Gogs extendable is overstatement. As far as I know, Gitlab supports external authentication providers only in the enterprise edition. Even if something has changed about it recently, somehow I doubt you're going to join #archlinux-devops tomorrow and say that you're eager to both maintain Gitlab and LDAP deployments, and then figure out LDAP integration everywhere. Let's just be realistic about what we need and what we can accomplish. Bartłomiej
