[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Salsa.d.o: Please support the implementation request for a global config option to change the default for "Custom CI config path" in Gitlab




On August 1, 2019 7:10:14 PM UTC, Bastian Blank <waldi@debian.org> wrote:
>On Thu, Aug 01, 2019 at 08:21:31PM +0200, Inaki Malerba wrote:
>> On 27/7/19 09:40, Bastian Blank wrote:
>> > The setting is per project, so it is available.  For now I say that
>> > changing this globally is too disruptive.
>> Of course it's a disruptive change, but what is the purpose of Salsa?
>
>It is a project management platform.
>
>> I think it's a tool *for* Debian and Debian Developers. Most of the
>> users surely will prefer that the default path for the CI
>configuration
>> on Debian projects is a Debian compatible path. Maybe we could open a
>> thread to discuss this on d-devel, if some day we have the feature to
>> make this change, but it's is not even planned yet.
>
>Maybe someone can come up with code to see how it works.
>
>Questions to be answered:
>- Is the setting only a default applied to new projects?
>- If yes, how do you inform users that a new project with
>  /.gitlab-ci.yml will not work?
>- If no, how do you inform users that an existing project with
>  /.gitlab-ci.yml will stop working?

I don't like any of these questions, I would prefer not having to answer to them.

My instinct for the most predictable and least surprising solution is to leave /.gitlab-ci.yml as default, per-project configurable and _clonable_ so that clones would simply inherit the original setting whatever it is.

>
>> Anyway, I think the best alternative for making this change less
>> disruptive is going to be group-level definitions[0] of this kind of
>> configurations.
>
>Maybe it would be better to fix stuff to work with /.gitlab-ci.yml than
>trying to hack around global settings?  Salsa is not Debian-only, we
>already have several upstream stuff on it.
>

Having a salsa global default different from the gitlab one is just surprising indeed, would "patch in" a solution for a quite specific case (plain debian package with default salsa-ci.yml) and would still leave diverging settings dead in the water at first clone.

I did not follow most closely this thread, is setting cloning being explored already?

>Regards,
>Bastian

Regards,
Domenico


Reply to: