Hi,
Deadline if there are no major objections: January 9. This is because
I'd like to do this migration before we start using blueprints
intensively again while working on sponsor deliverables.
In 2015 we decided to migrate our blueprints outside of our main
Git repository.
- Be able to push more documents to our blueprints (images, office
documents, etc.) without polluting our main repo.
- Lock down all web editing on our main website.
- Allow more people to push changes to blueprints through Git if they
prefer this to the web editor.
- Maybe some day, host our website on servers that we don't trust to
push to tails.git.
The implementation option we had chosen back then (setting up a new
ikiwiki) relied on sysadmin work, and never happened. Meanwhile, we
migrated to GitLab, so 2 new options are readily available to us:
- GitLab wiki
- regular (non-wiki) Git repository hosted on GitLab
I've compared these 3 options on
https://gitlab.tails.boum.org/tails/tails/-/issues/18079
IMO we can eliminate 2 of these options right away, because of deal
breakers, and I see no such blocker for the remaining option.
Here are the deal breakers I've spotted:
- ikiwiki:
- Lacks a nice syntax to link to GitLab issues, MRs, and commits
- Requires sysadmin work to migrate and maintain
- non-wiki Git repository hosted on GitLab:
- Lacks an easy way to attach files; this is one major use case for
our blueprints
- Lacks an easy way to create or rename a page
So, my questions to you today are:
- Do you agree that these are deal breakers?
- Is there a deal breaker that I missed for the "GitLab wiki" option?
Cheers!
