gitiles gerrit-review <-> GitHub

[Sven Selberg]

Hi,

The issue tracker for gitiles (server) is still kept on GitHub.
Should we move it to monorail?

There seem to be no replication of git content gerrit-review -> GitHub. master on GitHub is behind by several commits.
Should there be a replica on GitHub or should the GitHub repo be deprecated with a reference to gerrit-review?

/Sven

[Adrià Vilanova Martínez]

+1 to moving it to Monorail, it has much more features than GitHub and is open source.

As for the GitHub replica, I'm fine with both.

[Jonathan Nieder]

Hi,

Sven Selberg wrote:

> The issue tracker for gitiles (server) is still kept on GitHub.

> Should we move it to monorail?

I'd be happy to move Gitiles issue tracking to a component in https://crbug.com/gerrit, similar to how we currently handle issue tracking for https://gerrit.googlesource.com/git-repo.

If we do so, we would be guests relying on the kindness of the Gerrit project. Sven, I think you can do a reasonable job of representing the point of view of Gerrit maintainers on this point: do you think the Gerrit project will mind?

Thanks,

Jonathan

[Sven Selberg]

On Friday, January 14, 2022 at 9:59:16 PM UTC+1 Jonathan Nieder wrote:

Hi,

Sven Selberg wrote:

> The issue tracker for gitiles (server) is still kept on GitHub.

> Should we move it to monorail?

I'd be happy to move Gitiles issue tracking to a component in https://crbug.com/gerrit, similar to how we currently handle issue tracking for https://gerrit.googlesource.com/git-repo.

My initial thought was to have it as a separate project, but seeing as how git-repo is a component in the Gerrit project I guess this would be a suitable fate for gitiles as well (should we agree on moving the issue tracker).
Not quite sure I understand the implications of having it as a component in Gerrit, but FWIW I can't imagine there will be any major issues.

If we do so, we would be guests relying on the kindness of the Gerrit project. Sven, I think you can do a reasonable job of representing the point of view of Gerrit maintainers on this point: do you think the Gerrit project will mind?

I was under the impression that gitiles was (more or less) under the Gerrit project umbrella already, since the source-code is on gerrit-review, I guess I stand corrected.
As a representative of the gitiles maintainers, do you foresee any issues with moving the issue-tracker to Gerrit's monorail project?
Is there a big difference between (Gerrit Maintainers + Google) - Gitiles Maintainers?
Are there any open-source projects (outside of Gerrit) that uses gitiles that might mind?

To the extent to which I can speak on behalf of the Gerrit Project, I don't think the Gerrit project will mind.
If someone minds I'm sure they will make themselves heard in this thread :-)

BR
Sven

Thanks,

Jonathan

[Jonathan Nieder]

Hi again,

Svel Selberg wrote:

> do you foresee any issues with moving the issue-tracker to Gerrit's monorail project?

The main complexity is getting the issue tracker links in Gerrit and Gitiles to work correctly, since the namespaces for issue numbers are distinct. If we use full URLs in the "Bug:" line then it should work well.

> Is there a big difference between (Gerrit Maintainers + Google) - Gitiles Maintainers?

If I understand correctly, they're currently disjoint sets. That said, I'd be happy to welcome you to the Gitiles cabal :)

> To the extent to which I can speak on behalf of the Gerrit Project, I don't think the Gerrit project will mind.

> If someone minds I'm sure they will make themselves heard in this thread :-)

Perfect! Next week I'll look into next steps (whether there's an easy way to script migrating over the existing issues from GitHub). In the meantime, feel free to start using monorail for new bugs, get the transitional state documented in the README, etc.

Thanks,

Jonathan

[Sven Selberg]

On Friday, January 21, 2022 at 11:06:10 PM UTC+1 Jonathan Nieder wrote:

Hi again,

Svel Selberg wrote:

> do you foresee any issues with moving the issue-tracker to Gerrit's monorail project?

The main complexity is getting the issue tracker links in Gerrit and Gitiles to work correctly, since the namespaces for issue numbers are distinct. If we use full URLs in the "Bug:" line then it should work well.

We have solved similar issues by referencing the new issues from the old and vice-versa.
Match the tr for GitHub with \d{1,3} and for monorail with \d{5,}.
That way issue references of already merged commits will link to the GitHub issue-tracker whereas new commits will link to monorail issues. If those monorail issues were copied from GitHub there's a link to the GitHub issue for anyone that is interested in looking up the history.
 

> Is there a big difference between (Gerrit Maintainers + Google) - Gitiles Maintainers?

If I understand correctly, they're currently disjoint sets. That said, I'd be happy to welcome you to the Gitiles cabal :)

Sure. What does that mean?