Re: [Tails-dev] Proposal: migrate our blueprints to a GitLab…

Delete this message

Reply to this message
Author: Zen Fu
To: intrigeri, The Tails public development discussion list
Subject: Re: [Tails-dev] Proposal: migrate our blueprints to a GitLab wiki (#18079)

intrigeri <intrigeri@???> writes:
> 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

Thanks for the historic view and to all involved for the research.

> 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?

Not that I see.