From 89e191daea8f985eb9a1df995b070ac97a949712 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Tim Sutton Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2018 19:08:51 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] Updated QGISbugtracker (markdown) --- QGISbugtracker.md | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/QGISbugtracker.md b/QGISbugtracker.md index 8c9fa9d..ea6b42e 100644 --- a/QGISbugtracker.md +++ b/QGISbugtracker.md @@ -85,7 +85,9 @@ PRO: AGAINST: - less known than Github ? - Some features are Enterprise-version only ( OpenCore model) - +- This is not simply moving our issue tracker - it involves moving our code too +- GitHub is already working well for us for many years with no issues, switching to a new infrastructure creates a lot of flux with no obvious benefit. Our time, money and resources are better spent on our code not on our infrastructure +- Philosopy: Do we really required that everything we use is FOSS? Many (thousands) of OpenSource projects happily use GitHub to host their code without them percieving that their 'open sourceness' is 'diluted'. - **IMPORTANT AND IGNORED IN THE DISCUSSION SO FAR**: Splintering of resources - we have many repos on GitHub - are we going to move them all? it makes the scope of the task huge. - **IMPORTANT AND IGNORED IN THE DISCUSSION SO FAR**: Breaking existing workflows - if we migrate fully to GitLab we need to migrate many other things - commit hooks, CI, all sorts of things people have set up based on the current locations of the source. - have to come up with a plan to handle 'tagging'/tagging system of issues to be able to search tickets? I started with some idea in 2015: https://github.com/rduivenvoorde/temp/issues