4 ms·

I think this is great but the "Why KDE moved to GitLab" section is downright weird - doesn't seem to provide any clear reason why and mostly talks about how har

by zmmmmm 6y ago

I think this is great but the "Why KDE moved to GitLab" section is downright weird - doesn't seem to provide any clear reason why and mostly talks about how hard it is. Why put that section in if then to not properly address it? It is almost counterproductive because it makes me really wonder now why when they can't actually state a clear advantage.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
ogre_codes 6y ago
I was kind of scratching my head here too. It didn't say what platform it was on previously, what limits/ benefits they were looking for that made GitLab appealing. Just "It was the next logical choice"... why did they name the article "Why the KDE community is #MovingToGitlab" when they barely breached the topic?
bondia 6y ago
KDE moved because Phabricator is practically abandoned and KDE can't take it over. Furthermore, all KDE development is based on git and Phabricator abstracts the versioning systems, making the naming of things weird. They require weird cli integration (arcanist) not to rely on git semantics. Most contributors expect gitlab/github kind of workflows on the other hand. It's really not great to make newcomers learn how to use arc (which is really not that good and barely used elsewhere) when they can learn proper git commands that will be useful for them in many aspects of their professional life, or just reuse the knowledge if they're already familiar. I understand whoever wrote the article didn't want to be complaining about Phabricator as much as talking about how good gitlab is.
- epriest 6y ago
  Why do you believe Phabricator is practically abandoned?
- evilelectron 6y ago
  Not as per their git commit history https://github.com/phacility/phabricator https://github.com/phacility/phabricator
- 0xfaded 6y ago
  Did facebook stop using it internally? I'm personally in the phabricator camp, but if it lost the backing of facebook I'd be seeing the writing on the wall.
  - epriest 6y ago
    Facebook has not provided any contributions or material support to the open source version of Phabricator since around 2012.

by zmmmmm 6y ago

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

ogre_codes 6y ago

I was kind of scratching my head here too. It didn't say what platform it was on previously, what limits/ benefits they were looking for that made GitLab appealing. Just "It was the next logical choice"... why did they name the article "Why the KDE community is #MovingToGitlab" when they barely breached the topic?

bondia 6y ago

KDE moved because Phabricator is practically abandoned and KDE can't take it over. Furthermore, all KDE development is based on git and Phabricator abstracts the versioning systems, making the naming of things weird. They require weird cli integration (arcanist) not to rely on git semantics. Most contributors expect gitlab/github kind of workflows on the other hand. It's really not great to make newcomers learn how to use arc (which is really not that good and barely used elsewhere) when they can learn proper git commands that will be useful for them in many aspects of their professional life, or just reuse the knowledge if they're already familiar. I understand whoever wrote the article didn't want to be complaining about Phabricator as much as talking about how good gitlab is.

epriest 6y ago
Why do you believe Phabricator is practically abandoned?
evilelectron 6y ago
Not as per their git commit history https://github.com/phacility/phabricator https://github.com/phacility/phabricator
0xfaded 6y ago
Did facebook stop using it internally? I'm personally in the phabricator camp, but if it lost the backing of facebook I'd be seeing the writing on the wall.
- epriest 6y ago
  Facebook has not provided any contributions or material support to the open source version of Phabricator since around 2012.