jonas’now you know what you have to discuss on thursday
pep.yeah I was initially confused because I hadn't seen that LICENSE file
jonas’so one thing we could do would be to set up a two-way sync for the main branches between github and gitlab. then we’d use the CI on gitlab for all the automated tasks as well as MRs on gitlab, and travis CI for checking PRs on github.
jonas’then hitting the green button on either side of the trench would eventually reach the gitlab main branch and trigger the auto-CI
jonas’MRs on gitlab would get advanced stuff, editors wouldn’t have to worry too much about syncing things over.
jonas’this is all provided we can sort out the legal stuff around DCO/CLA/…. if we can’t, we could still run this setup without enabling MRs on the gitlab side.
jonas’pep., ^ what do you think?
pep.two-way sync, is that easy to do? gitlab feature? We'd still have to worry about PRs right? moving them over. As they're not branches on the xsf repo (well, however that's done internally on github, that's not public)
pep.And even if they were they wouldn't be declared "MR" on gitlab as that's an explicit action from the user
pep.Otherwise that works for me
jonas’no need to worry about moving PRs, because we can just hit merge on github and let the two-way sync do its thing
pep.Ah I see
jonas’I’d only two-way sync the main branches
pep.Editors would have to worry about two places still, that's a bit annoying and error-prone, but yeah otherwise that's better than the original "2." you proposed
jonas’the advantage for editors is though that we can simply hit Merge instead of doing things locally on the CLI
jonas’I think that is a viable trade-off
jonas’(especially since you can get email notifications from both places, so you don’t have to poll much)
jonas’re how to implement two-way sync: a GitHub Action with a write-access Deploy Key to the GitLab side which does a git push, and effectively the same on the other side
jonas’if two merges happen concurrently on both ends, that job will fail and the situation needs to be resolved manually by an editor
jonas’pep., also, if you think that the option I just proposed is bad, please say so directly
jonas’bad = too much work for editors
jonas’I currently don’t see it that way, but your voice counts
pep.I did ask myself if that was worth it, doing all this, tbh. But I think it is. Reduced build time, automatic archiving, sending of emails, possibly tagging
pep.And more goodies the day we actually switch, if we ever switch.
pep.It will be confusing for anybody new to the team or any external people and that should probably be explained. "What's the preferred venue" "What's the preferred way for you to submit stuff"
pep.But you're the most affected, I don't do as much as you so I'm happy to let you drive :)
jonas’sure, we need to update documentation
jonas’one point on my todo is also mkdir src && mv *.xml src
jonas’so that you don’t have to scroll down two miles to get to the repository readme
jonas’mail sent for standards@ to discuss
jonas’mail sent to standards@ to discuss
jonas’now to prepare some strawberries <3
jonas’16:51:31 pep.> But you're the most affected, I don't do as much as you so I'm happy to let you drive :)
I wish for that to not stay that way. So it is very very important that I hear editor voices which say "this is going to make it worse (for me)"
pep.yeah I hope for you it's not going to stay that way :x
jonas’I hope for the XSF
pep.Right I was gonna correct myself
jonas’because I’m not going to be around forever, according to the second law of thermodynamics
pep.It's not your fault if tomorrow you disappear
pep.Or tomorrow you just don't want to contribute anymore you should be free to do so :)
pep.It annoys me thinking that some of our roles here may be filled by guilt ("If I disappear tomorrow this will just get dropped"). It's probably not obvious to everyone though, and working towards making people realize is an uphill battle..
jonas’oh, I’m very aware of that
jonas’it is not the case for me, luckily
pep.I don't know if it affects me that much, certainly a bit. Board meeting minutes for example :x
jonas’I actually enjoy the roles I have. setting a schedule for chair/editor work has also definitely helped in not letting it slide for stupid reasons
pep.Which is why I started grumping
jonas’I would do them more often if it wasn’t such a bad time slot for me
jonas’(I like taking minutes, and people seem to like reading mine)
pep.Yeah it's just an example
jonas’but I agree that an automated tool would be better for this
pep.People also don't understand that not trying to figure this kind of issues in the community is in fact reinforcing the status quo and that makes me sad :(
jonas’is it really that, or is it that people feel powerless toward that?
pep.powerless? As in they can't help with minutes for example?
pep.(I also agree an automated solution would be best, even though we still need somebody to run the thing and maybe tidy it up before sending it)
jonas’pep., but if people who don’t want to help out with minutse, they also do that by guilt
pep.What I want out of that is mostly make it explicit. If one person is "fine" with continuing by themselves then good, otherwise sharing the guilt isn't too bad
pep.Working towards a solution to prevent this to happen in the future
jonas’obvious solution: make minute taking a membership duty and if you can’t do it without giving a reason, you can’t stand for reelection next time :>
jonas’I wonder what that’ll do to our membership numbers
jonas’I wonder what that’d do to our membership numbers
pep.I actually thought of such a solution
pep.But then there might be even less reasons to apply as a member :P
pep.I do want to encourage members to participate in the XSF life. I'm fairly annoyed that most members idle
pep.If a new member can spend 30mn-1h a week that would certainly alleviate work already from more involved members
pep.I am under the impression though that it's not interesting for some part of the membership to get in more members
jonas’I’m not quite sure what we get out of having more members to be honest
pep.Fresh air, for one :)
jonas’I mean diversity would be nice, but that’s not what I’m seeing with new members when we get any
pep.Probably because we're not looking for this
jonas’I’m not sure why we nede to be looking for it
pep.Maybe because I'm not happy with the status quo :)
KevFWIW, I managed to completely burn out on XSF stuff over the first 15 years or so. Although that's aided by me being burnt out with work too.
jonas’Kev, sorry to hear
KevI mean, I did Council for 10 years solid I think, chairing most of it, Iteam lead for probably nearly as long? Maybe less.
KevI know all this stuff is effort, and I'm grateful that you keep the Editors stuff moving. I'm not trying to be difficult when I raise support for staying on github, and I'm sorry if it comes across as such.
jonas’Kev, no, as I tried to repeatedly bring across: It is truly appreciated.
jonas’when you’re in the flow of doing things, it’s easy to overlook problems that’ll cause down the road
jonas’people calling me out on that are always good and I’m in the process of learning to be grateful for that
jonas’Kev, also, while we’re at it: thanks for your input in all the other places over the time and take care of yourself.
KevOh, sorry, I wasn't saying I need sympathy. When I said "burnt out" I was probably being misleading. I think I suffered from (real) burnout a few years back, but these days I'm bimbling along more or less.
jonas’I didn’t want to imply you were saying that. I am, however, also in the process to learn to thank people for things many others take for granted.
jonas’because why not, if its genuine, and maybe it makes people happy