Document GitLab as the only way to contribute to Samba?

[Martin Schwenke]

On Fri, 21 Jun 2019 13:05:17 +1200, Andrew Bartlett via samba-technical
<samba-technical at lists.samba.org> wrote:

> I gave a talk at SambaXP about our first year with GitLab, and one
> point I made is that it is *not OK* to have public contribution
> documentation that does not match our actual practice.
> 
> I was talking about GitHub, which we advertised but did not embrace
> (and which by the end caused new contributors to be told off,
> essentially).
> 
> I've recently found myself doing the same thing!  But now I'm berating
> contributors who follow our public documentation and so innocently send
> patches to samba-technical, or attach them to bugzilla. 
> 
> So, I would like to propose this.  That given the practice of the Samba
> Team and almost all contributors is to contribute via a merge request
> against https://gitlab.com/samba-team/samba that we document this, and
> only this, as how to contribute to new patches to Samba.
> 
> This is only one tiny step in a process to have clear, practical
> contribution instructions, but I would like to ensure we agree on this
> much.
> 
> Essentially it would mean a better version of this being prominently
> placed:
> 
> https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Samba_CI_on_gitlab#Creating_a_merge_request
> 
> and updates to:
> https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Using_Git_for_Samba_Development
> 
> Non patch, meta and broader architectural discussions still belong on
> samba-technical of course. 
> 
> Any thoughts?

I don't think it is the practice of the whole Samba Team.  I haven't
managed to get into the GitLab workflow, though I have used it.

Perhaps I'm the only one, but I don't think we should be mandating this
(yet?)...

peace & happiness,
martin