[core-workflow] Questions about the proposed workflows

[Nick Coghlan]

On 2 December 2015 at 09:24, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
> It's Dec 1, which means it's time for any questions people have about the
> proposed workflows so we can get answers by Dec 15.
>
> I have one question that applies to both proposals and one specific to
> GitLab. The general one is whether both Guido and me can both be happy. :)
> Guido doesn't want intermediate commits nor what he calls "merge turds" to
> show up in the history. I want to be able to do merges from the browser. Do
> either GitHub or GitLab provide a way through the web UI to give Guido what
> he wants, or will it always require having a checkout and SSH keys set up in
> order to do a PR merge? If only Guido can be made happy then that means
> either proposal becomes an easy way for people to get code hosting for their
> forks and a review tool but not a PR management platform since merges would
> occur outside the website and merges would simply be a `git push` which is
> basically what we do now to do the final merge for a patch.

GitLab Enterprise Edition has a fast-forward-only merge option that
disallows merge commits on the target branch:
http://doc.gitlab.com/ee/workflow/ff_merge.html
That then further enables rebasing of merge requests via the browser:
http://doc.gitlab.com/ee/workflow/rebase_before_merge.html

> The GitLab-specific question is what, if anything, is GitLab prepared to
> offer us? Both Nick and Barry have hinted that GitLab would host us, listen
> to our needs, etc., but it has always seemed to be speculation. Do we have
> concrete information as to what GitLab is willing to do for us?

I'll leave answering that to Barry, since he's the one that's actually
been talking to the GitLab folks :)

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan   |   ncoghlan at gmail.com   |   Brisbane, Australia