Thanks for bringing this up.
No strong opinions, more like some side comments:
What am I supposed to spot / see? And where is the tarball file download
On Mon, 2013-04-22 at 12:08 +0200, Andrea Veri wrote:
> The real question is: are tarballs really useful in some way? JHBuild
> and the new build.gnome.org based on OSTree don't require tarballs at
> all, they both clone all the needed modules and do the build. I see
> tarballs being useful for distribution's packagers but shouldn't
> cgit's snapshots be enough for that? (this is a new feature I've
> introduced yesterday at git.gnome.org, you can see it in action at
> [1])
link that I'm looking for? :P
> The next thing I would like to discuss is what the release team feelsWhich *functionality* gains are implied?
> as a possible improvement for git.gnome.org. Do we need something like
> Gitlab / Gitorious? [2] - [3]
I simply don't know exactly what Gitlab / Gitorious offer that you might
see as good reasons to consider them.
Splinter on bugzilla.gnome.org has been broken for ages, I always get
> Do we need a code review tool like Gerrit [4] or Review Board [5]?
> (note that we currently use Owen's splinter on bugzilla for doing
> code / patches reviews)
"Failed to retrieve attachment 123456" and gave up, though it was nice.
*If* we'd like to bikeshed, err, discuss about moving to a code review
tool, we should define criteria and check other project's evaluations
for the same problem first, e.g. MediaWiki's Gerrit use:
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Git/Gerrit_evaluation . LibreOffice and
Eclipse also use Gerrit when I checked a few months ago.
KDE (and Apache) use Review Board but I couldn't find any evaluations
(looks like the KDE Plasma team had started with it even earlier).
For GNOME's historical reasons against reviewboard, see
http://blog.fishsoup.net/2009/09/15/review-board-vs-git-bz/