Re: git-cl upload has stopped working (so has patchy)

[Trevor Daniels]

David Kastrup wrote Saturday, May 30, 2015 11:13 AM


> "Trevor Daniels" <address@hidden> writes:
> 
>> Trevor Daniels wrote Thursday, May 28, 2015 6:18 PM
>>> 
>>> James Lowe wrote Thursday, May 28, 2015 7:04 AM
>>>>
>>>> On 27/05/15 21:17, David Kastrup wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> So now git-cl -n works again.  But git cl does not just need to
>>>>> communicate with Rietveld.  Everything else (which basically means
>>>>> Google Code) doesn't, consequently.  So neither does Patchy.
>>>>
>>>> That explains why test-patchy (and probably accept/reject-patchy) don't
>>>> work either.
>>> 
>>> Given this problem I thought it prudent to see if I could still
>>> import the Issues DB from GoogleCode to Allura in SourceForge.  I
>>> started the import at 12 noon today (28 May) and after a
>>> disconcertingly long pause before anything happened it now seems to
>>> be proceeding normally.
>>
>> This upload completed after 39 hours.  It contains 4416 tickets, the
>> latest one being Issue 4424, so it seems to be complete up to 28 May
>> 2015.  I've edited the authors to be "GoogleImporter" rather than
>> "*anonymous" and started the re-import again.
>>
>> Given the current problems with git-cl, patchy, etc I wonder if this
>> is a good time to cut our losses and move to using Allura on
>> SourceForge, since GoogleCode is scheduled to die anyway in a little
>> over 2 months.  Manually editing the Issues on Allura is pretty much
>> the same as manually editing them at GoogleCode.  Any available effort
>> could then be directed at making git-cl etc work there.
>>
>> Is there any alternative on the table?
>>
>> What do you think?
> 
> Well, you have experimented with local hosting as well, didn't you?

No, but Federico did.  He found similar import times of 36 hours or so.

>  So
> this might give us some estimates regarding the resource usage for our
> current bug database.

The full DB is 111Mb when tarred and zipped.  No idea how big this is when 
loaded into the Allura DB.  Maybe Federico has some figures.

> That should be helpful for enquiring at Savannah
> about the prospects for hosting off Allura there.
> 
> That option was sort of the point for going with openly available
> software rather than moving all to GitHub.

OK, I'll wait for someone to make these enquiries.  The last time I interacted 
with people at Savannah they lost interest as soon as there was no response to 
their request for someone from LilyPond to help with the development required 
to support images.  So I would guess they would expect similarly someone from 
LilyPond to install and maintain Allura in the event they were willing to 
provide the computing resources.  In the meantime I'll endeavor to keep the DB 
at SourceForge reasonably up to date, importing every couple of weeks or so, in 
case everything blows up or no other solution materialises.

The other alternative is to operate Allura on a server of our own.  Clearly 
that would have implications for ongoing support which might rule it out.  Is 
this something worth exploring?

Trevor