Re: Regarding gitlab
On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 6:32 PM, Daniel Martí <mvdan@mvdan.cc> wrote:
> We didn't come to much of an agreement, but there has been some
> progress:
>
>> # Extracting information from a git repository
>> # Provide access to Gitlab::Git library
>> gem 'gitlab_git', '~> 1.3.0'
>
>> # Ruby/Rack Git Smart-HTTP Server Handler
>> gem 'gitlab-grack', '~> 1.0.0', require: 'grack'
>
>> # LDAP Auth
>> gem 'gitlab_omniauth-ldap', '1.0.2', require: "omniauth-ldap"
>
>> # Syntax highlighter
>> gem "gitlab-pygments.rb", '~> 0.3.2', require: 'pygments.rb'
>
>> # Git Wiki
>> gem "gitlab-gollum-lib", "~> 1.0.0", require: 'gollum-lib'
>
>> gem "raphael-rails", git: "https://github.com/gitlabhq/raphael-rails.git";
>
> These are the only patched dependencies left. They told me they would
> create separate ruby gems for all of them, so that we would be able to
> package them separately from the original gems (i.e. having ruby-grack
> and then gitlab-ruby-grack). raphael-rails hasn't had such conversion
> yet, it seems.
>
> Would that situation suffice? I've just written the team another mail,
> asking how difficult would it be to use the original libs (adapting
> gitlab to them), seeing how gitlab has changed so much as of late.
The changes I have seen doesn't justify yet another package.
For pygments.rb the only interesting change is one patch to add the
GitLab formatter. I have asked gitlab upstream why they just don't pull
request the original upstream but haven't got any answer yet. There is
also a change for changing the python shebang to from python to
python2, but we don't want that.
--
Per
Reply to: