Re: GNOME Moduleset Reorganization vs. L10N
- From: Gil Forcada <gforcada gnome org>
- To: Diego Escalante Urrelo <diegoe gnome org>, foundation-list <foundation-list gnome org>
- Cc: Shaun McCance <shaunm gnome org>, GNOME i18n <gnome-i18n gnome org>, desktop-devel-list <desktop-devel-list gnome org>
- Subject: Re: GNOME Moduleset Reorganization vs. L10N
- Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2010 14:32:07 +0200
El dv 15 de 10 de 2010 a les 13:29 -0500, en/na Diego Escalante Urrelo
> El vie, 15-10-2010 a las 08:29 -0700, Sandy Armstrong escribió:
> > I'm not a fan myself, but I can see how once a project was already
> > hooked on a Launchpad-oriented process, it would be work to migrate to
> > GNOME infrastructure.
> Agree, how could we shorten that difference? I think this is the real
> issue, at least for this part of the proposal.
Get a mug, that's a quite long mail, you have been warned!
(Added foundation-list since I think the foundation as an umbrella has
some of the proposed solutions, see  for the previous discussion)
Straight to the point, yes, but GNOME as a whole is big enough to not
(easily) fit on any other project hosting solution so it's not even
feasible (on my humble opinion) to think about getting our own launchpad
instance (since launchpad, the software, is free software).
Someone up to do an in-depth feature comparison between GNOME
infrastructure, Launchpad, SourceForge, Google code and other project
(Note the following list has been collected in 10 minutes and for a
person who really doesn't use any of them in detail at all, so big
mistakes are sure to be there)
>From GNOME we have:
- git source control
- cgit interface to git
- D-L for translations
- mailing lists
- live.gnome.org for wiki
- web hosting (?)
- blog hosting
- ftp for releases
- on-line documentation (http://library.gnome.org)
- piwik instance (is open to any GNOME service?)
- tomboy on-line ? (when launched)
- gtg on-line ? (there have been a GSoC for it)
>From Launchpad (taken from launchpad.net front page):
- bug tracking
- code hosting
- code reviews (interface to propose branch merges?)
- mailing lists
- answers and FAQ
>From SourceForge (taken from
- Code hosting
- Web hosting
- application hosting (mediawiki, trac, wordpress ...)
- bug tracking
- mailing lists
- file releases
- mirroring services (mostly to distribute file releases)
>From Google code (taken from http://code.google.com/p/support/wiki/FAQ )
- Project workspaces with simple membership controls
- Version control via Subversion (they have other version controls)
- Source code browsing and reviews
- Issue tracking
- Wiki pages
- Mailing lists at groups.google.com
= GNOME missing modules =
- For PPA/repository-ready for distributions OBS  could be used.
- answers/FAQ like web apps could be done with Shapado.com ?
- blueprints could be made as bugzilla's tracker bugs?
- application hosting ... just resources and admins to take control over
- maybe switching cgit to gitorious (the software) ...
All in all we don't score that bad on features, but we are missing a big
point not shown on the previous listings: integration and self-creation.
= Integration =
All components described above are shown in a seamless integrated
interface, so jumping from code to bugs and back and link blueprints to
branches is easy.
GNOME has already a single-sign-on infrastructure (?) so as a first
- integrate everything on GNOME's SSO
- create a welcome page much like any other service main page (i.e.
http://launchpad.net http://sf.net http://code.google.com) with just
pointers to projects and their services
- on each module (cgit, bugzilla, wiki...) start integrating other
modules pointers via plugins (look and ask the respective projects
owners, - bugzilla, dokuwiki, cgit - if they are eager to also work on
that and get the code upstream to easily maintain everything
= Self-creation =
You can go to their platform, create a user and start your project.
What should we do in our GNOME infrastructure to allow that? Obviously
loads of servers, admins to control them all  and resources to pay
for all of them (at least servers, volunteers and the already part-time
admin can be enough?).
== The Foundation role ==
Quite a few people said that they were more than willing to pay a
monthly/yearly fee to get their Tomboy notes on GNOME's servers, also
there could be a fundraising campaign on FoG to purchase 3 (more? less?)
servers to host all these services.
So the Foundation could help here getting the resources to implement
that. For example:
Exchange a board fee to a brand-new server each year, or a part-time
employer work on GNOME's infrastructure? HP, Dell and other hardware
manufacturers could be interested in this kind of agreements. As a
hardware and software manufacturers they could not see benefits on being
on GNOME's advisory board, but they could be interested in this kind of
agreements to get their "hosted by XX" on each GNOME web platform
Other small companies who can't afford a board fee could also be
interested on that, and even willing to pay a fee (just like github.com)
to host their free software there.
I'm glad you reached here, thanks!!
 Integration with Opensuse Build Service
( http://en.opensuse.org/Portal:Build_Service ) maybe is even better
than what Launchapd has? Note that I don't know at all any of them, just
what they do.
 If not with the Tomboy on-line we will start having one :)
 Surely if we have more projects more contributors will be eager to
get a shell account on the servers and update, fix and integrate them.
> gnome-i18n mailing list
> gnome-i18n gnome org
[ca] guifi.net - una xarxa lliure que no para de créixer
[en] guifi.net - a non-stopping free network
] [Thread Prev