RSB repo commits need approval

[Chris Johns]

On 28/4/2023 4:05 am, Gedare Bloom wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 3:27 AM Karel Gardas <karel at functional.vision> wrote:
>> On 4/27/23 08:13, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>>> Why
>>> don't we use a Git pull request workflow with CI pipelines in the RTEMS
>>> Project?
>>
>> I don't know, but certainly github.com is not available as an
>> open-source solution which may be seen as a major roadblock. Am I right
>> assuming that GitLab Community is the most close to that and available
>> for running by anyone?
> 100% this is the main reason, and most likely GitLab is where we would
> go. I believe the main issue to getting that in place at the moment is
> appropriate mechanisms to fund the remaining server upgrades and then
> installation/setup of the gitlab service on RTEMS Project
> infrastructure.

The work on this has currently slowed due to personal reasons outside of the
project. I hope we stay on the selected course and we see things start to move
again (pun intended).

The topic of commercial services was discussed on discord recently. A commercial
service needs someone to pay for it and we do not have a working foundation that
can do this for us independently and transparently on behalf of the community.
Companies and individuals are not suitable to hold the accounts and the control
that brings.

>> As an observer on another project with GitLab (GHC Haskell compiler)
>> I've seen this solution is not free as a work free, but requires some
>> man-hours investments...
>>
> Yes.
> 
>> So the question after "yes" to migrate (if the consensus is found!) is
>> "who will pay the price and do the job"...
>>
> Yes. Generally speaking, we have an excellent IT support in the
> background via Amar, but it can be a lot of work for him at times, and
> anything beyond the usual maintenance activities definitely requires
> more time/money allocations.

Thanks for mentioning this.

Chris