Gitorious plan

[Ken Dreyer]

Hi Ruby SIG,

I'm interested in getting Gitorious into Fedora, and I've outlined the
steps necessary on the wiki [1]. I figured I would throw this out
there for feedback. I'm wondering if anyone see any other things to
consider along with what I've written?

Also, now that rubygem-ruby-net-ldap has been EOL'd in Fedora, does
anyone have a tips or pointers for porting to the net-ldap Gem?

- Ken

[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ktdreyer/Gitorious

I would like to see Gitlab http://gitlabhq.com

--

Nihad Abbasov

On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 10:43 PM, Ken Dreyer  wrote:
> Hi Ruby SIG,
>
> I'm interested in getting Gitorious into Fedora, and I've outlined the
> steps necessary on the wiki [1]. I figured I would throw this out
> there for feedback. I'm wondering if anyone see any other things to
> consider along with what I've written?
>
> Also, now that rubygem-ruby-net-ldap has been EOL'd in Fedora, does
> anyone have a tips or pointers for porting to the net-ldap Gem?
> Ken
>
> [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ktdreyer/Gitorious
> _______________________________________________
> ruby-sig mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/ruby-sig

[Vít Ondruch]

Dne 3.8.2012 19:43, Ken Dreyer napsal(a):
> Hi Ruby SIG,
>
> I'm interested in getting Gitorious into Fedora, and I've outlined the
> steps necessary on the wiki [1]. I figured I would throw this out
> there for feedback. I'm wondering if anyone see any other things to
> consider along with what I've written?
>
> Also, now that rubygem-ruby-net-ldap has been EOL'd in Fedora, does
> anyone have a tips or pointers for porting to the net-ldap Gem?

This was just rename from rubygem-ruby-net-ldap to rubygem-net-ldap as 
far as I remember. So it should be no problem.

Otherwise, I would suggest you to read the Redmine discussion earlier in 
this list. I am afraid that the issues will be the same.

Vit

[Ken Dreyer]

On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 2:57 AM, Vít Ondruch  wrote:
> This was just rename from rubygem-ruby-net-ldap to rubygem-net-ldap as far
> as I remember. So it should be no problem.

Good deal. I later found out that upstream even has a patch in their
queue to follow this rename in their gemspec.[1]
> Otherwise, I would suggest you to read the Redmine discussion earlier in
> this list. I am afraid that the issues will be the same.

Yes, that thread is a good description of the same issues Gitorious
will face. I'll quote one of the parts I found most relevant[2]

On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 6:14 AM, Vít Ondruch  wrote:
> Dne 19.7.2012 09:51, Emanuel Rietveld napsal(a):
> > The right thing to do is to work hard, track development of all
> > dependency relationships on Fedora (perhaps responsibility of package
> > maintainer), know when api-breaking changes are going to happen and
> > work with upstreams as early as possible to move them over to the new
> > version.
>
> I like this scenario, but who will do that? If you volunteer, then there is
> no problem :) But it means that you will become more or less Redmine
> developer.

I have contributed a couple patches to upstream already, and I
understand that this is going to have to involve some developer
legwork. I figured I would try it as an experiment to see what is
possible.

I'm slowly publishing my interim work on fedorapeople.org. I intend to
document FPG compromises very clearly on the wiki page, and then
slowly chip away at them. At the same time, I can be submitting the
"easier" requisite gems for review into Fedora proper. If I can keep a
running dashboard of the issues, hopefully it will not be
insurmountable :)

I understand that Ruby's culture is all about bundling, and trying to
counteract that as a distro can be a bit like pushing a boulder
uphill. But at the same time, it's not like the question of bundling
is a new one. So I figured I might as well take a crack at it with
Gitorious and see what it's like.

One of the areas I could use the most help with from the Ruby SIG is
understanding what dependencies are a "bad idea". For example, in the
Redmine review, Jan pointed out that one of the Gem dependencies was
abandoned upstream[3]. In my wiki page[4], does anyone see Gems in the
list that stand out as similarly problematic?

- Ken

[1] https://groups.google.com/d/msg/gitorious/gpyb3Qh1Hb8/J2M-9rrpIw8J
[2] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/ruby-sig/2012-July/001074.html
[3] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/825495#c1
[4] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ktdreyer/Gitorious

[Vít Ondruch]

Dne 9.8.2012 19:07, Ken Dreyer napsal(a):
> I have contributed a couple patches to upstream already, and I
> understand that this is going to have to involve some developer
> legwork. I figured I would try it as an experiment to see what is
> possible.

That is the word of man ;) Good to hear that.
> I'm slowly publishing my interim work on fedorapeople.org. I intend to
> document FPG compromises very clearly on the wiki page, and then
> slowly chip away at them. At the same time, I can be submitting the
> "easier" requisite gems for review into Fedora proper. If I can keep a
> running dashboard of the issues, hopefully it will not be
> insurmountable :)
>
> I understand that Ruby's culture is all about bundling, and trying to
> counteract that as a distro can be a bit like pushing a boulder
> uphill. But at the same time, it's not like the question of bundling
> is a new one. So I figured I might as well take a crack at it with
> Gitorious and see what it's like.
>
> One of the areas I could use the most help with from the Ruby SIG is
> understanding what dependencies are a "bad idea". For example, in the
> Redmine review, Jan pointed out that one of the Gem dependencies was
> abandoned upstream[3]. In my wiki page[4], does anyone see Gems in the
> list that stand out as similarly problematic?

On first look, I'm curious about hoe, echoe, gemcutter, rubyforge. They 
seems to be development or better to say deployment dependencies. So I 
believe it should be possible to get rid of them. They are probably used 
in some Rakefile for some management tasks.

Vit
> Ken
>
> [1] https://groups.google.com/d/msg/gitorious/gpyb3Qh1Hb8/J2M-9rrpIw8J
> [2] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/ruby-sig/2012-July/001074.html
> [3] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/825495#c1
> [4] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ktdreyer/Gitorious
> _______________________________________________
> ruby-sig mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/ruby-sig