Setting up GitLab for fedorahosted.org

Axilleas Pipinellis axilleas at archlinux.gr
Wed Apr 10 20:47:48 UTC 2013


On 04/10/2013 11:21 PM, Jeffrey Ollie wrote:

> 2) Of the Ruby gems that _are_ packaged, many of them are the wrong version.
Yeap! Using http://www.isitfedoraruby.com/stats/gemfile_toolI was able
to see this.Some dependencies of Gitlab are also frozen to some previous
version.
See https://gemnasium.com/gitlabhq/gitlabhq
> 3) For some of the Ruby gems that GitLab requires, it requires git
> snaphots of non-released versions,or versions that have been
> forked/patched by GitLab developers.
That is also trueand could be cumbersome to package.
> 4) I'm not sure GitLab releases tarballs, as the install instructions
> refer to checking out git branches, even for the stable release
> branch.
Luckily, they use tags
https://github.com/gitlabhq/gitlabhq/tags
> 5) There's no ability to fork a project from the web interface, and
> thus have GitLab track merge requests.  There's some upstream work on
> implementing this feature but all of the patches that I saw had been
> rejected.  Personally, I feel that this is a big show-stopper as it's
> one of GitHub's best features and why it has become so popular.
I want to believe that at some point this will be implemented. Gitlab
has gained
a lot of supporters the past year and the project is constantly
evolving. Same goes
with the repositories' public access that Kevin brought up in his
previous mail.
> 6) I have pretty decent systemd service files for GitLab, let me know
> if you want 'em.
That would be great, thanks! Email me or contact me via github :)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/infrastructure/attachments/20130410/2f3bcd84/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the infrastructure mailing list