KDE Begins Its Transition To GitLab, Plasma 5.20 Seeing Early Activity

[make_adobe_on_Linux!]

Why is GitLab considered a DevOps leader when they run chef in all their docker images? Is it really an "image" if chef needs to configure everything when you launch a container based on it?

[aronwolf]

Why is GitLab considered a DevOps leader when they run chef in all their docker images? Is it really an "image" if chef needs to configure everything when you launch a container based on it?

I have worked for 2 companies that use GitLab. It has some very nice features, like the integrated GitLab-Ci, but it also has many features that many developers and companies do not use. Most of the features for DevOps, that offer GitLab, are rarely used(E.g. AUto DevOps). So I agree with you, that they are not really DevOps leaders but they are very great in other areas.

[ferry]

Am I the only one who very much dislikes GitLab's interface?

No. There are more.

[make_adobe_on_Linux!]

ferry aronwolf OK, so are there Git-based self-hosted alternatives that are compatible with git flow, have code review, and some decent Jenkins integration? I used to like Gerrit (for UI / ease of use) but other devs don't like that it isn't git flow compatible. I also would consider "merge approvals" to be a basic enough feature to be included in the free tier.

[bug77]

Is it really an "image" if chef needs to configure everything when you launch a container based on it?

Actually, yes. Many application need to draw their configuration from somewhere on startup.
Now, if we're talking about opening ports in a firewall or other stuff that belong in a base image, that's a slightly different story.

[szymon_g]

Glad to see they chose GitLab over GitHub.
Especially with Microsoft making many announcements in regards to open source lately, too great is my mistrust in their politics.

Microsoft is the wolf in sheep's clothing !

MS does closed source- bad.
MS does open source- bad.

There is no way to satisfy some.

[schmalzler]

Nor did I say it was. I was in fact not even aware of the specifics, because I don't care for it. It is their project and their choice how they manage it. I'm honestly just glad they're not choosing GitHub for the above mentioned reason.

So why did you comment at all if you don't care about the specifics? Just for bashing MS?
For your info: gitlab is 1) an online service through gitlab.org, the interface is available as 2) a software package that you can install and run locally. github is just an online service, they don't offer the software they use for download, everything is closed. I don't think kde would ever rely 100% on such a closed service as it means they give up control over the core of their development.

[stevecrox]

make_adobe_on_Linux! Why use GitFlow?

KDE developers don't commit directly to a development branch, they work in feature branches which are submitted for pull requests.

As far as I can tell almost every professional team takes action from tickets and works atleast in a local branch before pushing remote.

Most CI's can be hooked into pull reviews and can perform a build and provide feedback into the pull request. That means the branch your pushing into is an always releasable.

The only real extra is the creation of a release branch which is like 1 line in a release pipeline.

Ive yet to see any team implement gitflow, without it being the normal dev workflow just with more branches and extra steps.

[Nocifer]

MS does closed source- bad.
MS does open source- bad.

There is no way to satisfy some.

It's not a matter of MS doing open source or not, it's a matter of MS always only doing whatever it takes to further their own goals, snuff out the competition and establish a monopoly for their products (or further cement an already existing one).

Nobody gives a single f*** whether they do it in open or closed source. As a company they're rotten to the core, and people who value freedom (like most of the Linux community) usually don't get along with rotten companies that just a scant few years ago used to call them a "cancer" and distribute documents to their shareholders with instructions on how to snuff out said competition by EEE them. Neither do people like the fact that such a rotten company bought their way to the manager position of the number 1 open source hub in the web, i.e. GitHub. It's literally like putting the wolf in charge of guarding the sheep.

Also, as an addendum to all those that try to defend MS and its practices: do keep in mind that "embrace, extend and extinguish" is not a term invented by some basement-dwelling conspiracy theorist, it's a real term coined by Microsoft themselves to describe their business practices in their internal documents. So please, spare us the irony.

[sdack]

So why did you comment at all if you don't care about the specifics?

To give my respect to the KDE project.