On 2020-07-04 04:27, Maarten Dammers wrote: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Release_Engineering_Team/GitL… As an update, it seems like we're going backwards (a good thing) and going to have some consultation process/working group. At [1] I've suggested that someone from the Pywikibot community be included given how long it took us to do the SVN -> Git migration and how we haven't really had our needs met using Wikimedia CI (someone who's more active should correct me if I'm wrong/out of date on that). [1] https://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=Topic:Vpbt50rwxgb2r6qn&topi… -- Legoktm _______________________________________________ pywikibot mailing list pywikibot(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/pywikibot

Isn’t this decided already as I have read Wikitech-l Digest, Vol 204, Issue 7? No glue what this means for us and our infrastructure. Surely we would have a lot of work to follow this change or get another solution running. (Haven’t we a discussion about it 4 years ago?) And only a few active people for our project. I remember the change from svn to gerrit was very hard and I was nearby giving up. And we lost other people like Binaris. The main problem for me was git/gerrit until I found a proper way to get it running (and wrote a manual for it). Thanks to Merlijn who gave me the crucial hint there. For the new place I fear the main problems would be the CI setup and I think we would need support for it. Best xqt Am 09.07.2020 um 23:14 schrieb Huji Lee <huji.huji(a)gmail.com>om>:  I think that is a great idea. If Xqt could do that, it would be awesome. On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 4:20 PM Kunal Mehta <legoktm(a)member.fsf.org> wrote: _______________________________________________ pywikibot mailing list pywikibot(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/pywikibot _______________________________________________ pywikibot mailing list pywikibot(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/pywikibot

Yes other things are important too. How can the review process be implemented. I made some PR at github an it is painfull: checkout the repository to a local working copy, create a new branch for the changes, fork the repository at github, submit the changes to the fork, create a pull request, wait and see. If the base has changed, deleting the fork and recreating it for a new patch is easier then try to forward the fork base to the repository one. In summary I fear some kind of deja-vu. Anyway we need technical support for a lot of things, documentation for volunteer and a lot of how-tos about review task must be cleared first. Best xqt Am 29.07.2020 um 15:47 schrieb Huji Lee <huji.huji(a)gmail.com>om>:  The transition from svn to git was hard; that is partly because git and svn have totally different philosophies, and partly because the people who lead those transitions are programmers by trade and the way they documented it was not the right/sufficient way of documentation for habitual volunteer contributors (like me). The transition from gerrit to github can/should be simpler because we are staying within the git world. But your point, xqt, about documentation is important. One approach is to *demand* from WMF to provide support for transitioning CI and other things. On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 12:47 AM <info(a)gno.de> wrote: _______________________________________________ pywikibot mailing list pywikibot(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/pywikibot _______________________________________________ pywikibot mailing list pywikibot(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/pywikibot