[TIP] [unittest2] Issues DB migrated off of google code.

[Ben Finney]

Robert Collins <robertc at robertcollins.net> writes:

> GitLab's issue tracker isn't federated. (Few are).

According to <URL:https://about.gitlab.com/features/>, the issue tracker
is part of the free-software GitLab. Do you have information otherwise?

> Thirdly, GitLab is no more or less federated than Github AFAICT

My point isn't about what features are there. My point is about what
features are locked in to the provider — whether the (for example) issue
tracker can be migrated, with the rest of the project, to a different
provider retaining continuity.

GitHub fails on that.

> certainly googling found
> http://feedback.gitlab.com/forums/176466-general/suggestions/5097708-implement-cross-server-federated-merge-requests
> which shows its not federated today.

I see. Thanks for correcting my incorrect use of “federated”.

So I re-phrase the question: Can we move the issue tracker to a provider
where it's not locked in?

> Fourthly, there's absolutely nothing morally wrong

Not the argument I was making. I am arguing from practical concerns:
there are issue trackers which don't lock the project in, and those are
a lower risk than a locked-in service.

> Fourthly GitLab *service* is absolutely proprietary.

My understanding is that a project hosting its issue tracker on
GitLab.com can migrate to a free-software instance of GitLab, and keep
moving forward with the same data from that point. Where is that
incorrect?

-- 
 \     “Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering?” “Uh, I think so, |
  `\         Brain, but we'll never get a monkey to use dental floss.” |
_o__)                                           —_Pinky and The Brain_ |
Ben Finney