Code from this talk → Git Project Manager
git is a Distributed Concurrent
GitHub is a
Can we do without Github™?
Betteridge's law of headlines is an adage that states:
Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no.
Here the answer is YES!
- Linux (only mail)
- GHC used a self hosted instance of phabricator + trac
- many others I don't know
All right, we can, but should we?
__ _______ ____ _ \ \ / / ____/ ___|| | \ V /| _| \___ \| | | | | |___ ___) |_| |_| |_____|____/(_)
- Internet (decentralized, email, bbs, usenet, etc…)
- P2P -> no business
- Centralized -> business, steal data!!!!
- Decentralized again!
- cryptobulshit: crash business
$$$$ -> #[email protected]*!
- bio blockchains: sustainable business
- old fashionned style: ???
- cryptobulshit: crash business
GitHub™: Social Network
- user management & trust
GitHub™: its free!
If you're not paying for it, you're the product being sold.
$$: Pay for private repositories
From their website (in that order):
- Code Review: comment diffs, approve, refuse, etc…
- Project Management: issues, milestones, dashboard, etc…
- Integrations: travis, slack, etc…
- Team Management: access rights, community guidelines, etc…
- Social Coding: follow, explore, share, etc…
- Documentation: github pages, wiki, …à
- Code Hosting: all your code in one place, tree view, blame view, etc…
Most GitHub™ features put data in their own internal closed representation:
- Pull Request & review
Note there are tools to export them. Ex: migrate to Gitlab
GitHub™ is great today but can suck tomorrow
- bloatware remember digg, readitlater?
- downgradeware Swagger-UI v3 (v2 is neat), reddit new redesign (looks better, but slow)
- payware You rely on our feature, but now, we want you to move or to pay. Fair ;)
- crapware Nothing works as expected unless you pay: Twitter streaming API?
- dieware Remember Friendfeed? Google Reader™?
GitHub™ force all your team member to use GitHub™
Were you already forced to:
- use PowerPoint? Excel? Word?
- code in PHP? in Java?
- work on windows? Harder need to ssh to UNIX machines?
- use Eclipse instead of vim/emacs?
- use a super complex GUI instead of a few command line tools?
REAL STORY @WORK: github dashboard is slow & terrible for the manager.
Why you shouldn't rely too much on GitHub™?
- Github™ is great to get you started:
- nothing to install
- only high level interface
- everything explained with nice docs
- github is really a great product
- The hidden price to pay:
- use closed source services
- give freely many private infos
- you must TRUST github for privacy, private account
Why not self hosted Gitlab then?
Gitlab is a better alternative but:
- You still keep the metas of your project in the Gitlab server in some DB.
- You still force all the member of your team to use your Gitlab version, with your Gitlab plugins, with your Gitlab settings, etc…
- Gitlab push a big warn so you are pushed to upgrade (new features & anti-features)
Git Project Manager
- can't clone everything
- big dependence on private tooling (that could change or being interrupted)
- force same tooling choices accross your team members
- put metas in git branches CLONE ALL THE THINGS!!!!
- use text files for everything DO NOT FORCE ANY TOOL
- only rely on conventions, better on standardized conventions HELP TO WRITE SPECIFIC OPEN SOURCE TOOLS
Git Project Manager
- command line tool
- integrate your project management metas in your git repo
- automate a few common tasks
- follow a few conventions
- people on the team don't need to install or use
- they just need to follow a minimal set of conventions
- want to use other conventions? Write yourself a
gpmin a few hours.
- but really there are very few conventions
- text files
- Project Management metas goes in the branch
Encouraged but not
- encourage to use
org-modeformat but you can change
- issues goes in
- reviews goes in
- docs goes in
- serve goes in your XDG data dir (standard)
git is awesome!
org-mode is awesome
- TODO list oriented document convention
- Extremely versatile:
- issues, bug tracking, comments
- handling with minimal friction code reviews
- basic trello (TODO, IN-PROGRESS, DONE)
- scrum (EPIC / USER-STORY / etc…)
- EPIC with different statuses (prep, specified,etc..), comments
- user stories with evaluation, different status, comments
- QA status
- Ops status
Create a git project
mkdir -p /tmp/gpm-playground/testprj cd /tmp/gpm-playground/testprj echo "Hello GPM" > README git init . git add README git commit -m "Initial commit"
gpm init (1)
GPM -- Git Project Manager ========================== Create a new branch gpm (be sure the branch gpm doesn't already exists) git checkout --orphan gpm Switched to a new branch 'gpm' cleanup the branch git rm --cached -r . git clean -fd
gpm init (2)
* issue.org git add issues.org git add templat * wiki.org git add wiki.or * reviews.org create some example review for inspiration reviews/write-contributing-yogsototh.org git add reviews create some review templates templates/new-review.org git add templates
gpm init (3)
* hooks/ Copyings default hooks into the hooks directory git add hoo * server init create dir: /Users/yaesposi/.local/share/gpm/public git init . git rev-parse --show-toplevel git rev-parse --show-toplevel git clone --mirror /tmp/gpm-playground/testprj ~/.local/share/gpm/public/testprj.git Cloning into bare repository '.../testprj.git'... done. git update-server-info git commit -m 'gpm initialized' git checkout master Switched to branch 'master'
> git checktout gpm > tree . ├── hooks │ ├── applypatch-msg.sample │ ├── commit-msg.sample │ └── ... ├── issues.org ├── reviews │ └── write-contributing-yogsototh.org ├── templates │ ├── new-issue.org │ └── new-review.org └── wiki.org 3 directories, 16 files
> gpm hooks Usage: gpm hooks sync Handle hooks for this git repository Available options: -h,--help Show this help text Available commands: sync Synchronize hooks from gpm branch
#+TODO: TODO(t) STARTED(s) WAITING(w) | DONE(d) CANCELLED(c) * Basic Usages ** TODO Do thing 3 ** STARTED Do thing 2 ** DONE Do thing 1
issues.org Complex workflow, review
#+PROPERTY: ASSIGNEE #+PROPERTY: REVIEWER #+TODO: REVIEW(i) | MERGED(m) #+TODO: ACCEPTED(a) CHANGE_REQUESTED(c) QUESTION(q) FEEDBACK(f) | REFUSED(r) ** REVIEW Basic review process :PROPERTIES: :BRANCH: explain-review-process :ASSIGNEE: yogsototh :END: *** ACCEPTED Review finished :PROPERTIES: :REVIEWER: shubby :END:
issues.org Full Professional Usage
#+TAGS: epic(e) user_story(u) task(t) qa(q) ops(o) * Some Title :epic: ** Some User Story :story: *** Dev Task :task:dev: *** Document Task :task:doc: *** QA Task :task:qa: *** Ops Task :task:ops:
> gpm new-issue -i
- web interface:
git instaweb(port 1234)
- git server:
git daemon(port 9418)
Usage: gpm serve (start | stop | update | path) Serve the git to the web Available options: -h,--help Show this help text Available commands: start Start to serve all gpm tracked repositories stop Stop to serve all gpm tracked repositories update Update the served git repository path Show the path of the bare repository
gpm review: classical workflow
- dev create a new feature branch
- reviewer review the branch
- dev pull the
gpm retrievethe reviews
- dev take feedbacks into account
- goto 2 until reviewer accept the branch
- integration manager/dictator/lieutenant merge the branch
gpm review: reviewer (step 2 of previous
- reviewer pull the remote feature branch
- gpm review start: create a local file
- write the review:
- stop the review: copy the local file in gpm branch and commit it
gpm updateto serve the updated
Proof of concept
gpmis a proof of concept but so simple its already usable
- git clone should provide most of your projects data
- don't enforce tooling on your team, use text files
- I advise you to use org-mode it is awesome! REALLY!
- vimer? ⇒ spacemacs or doom-emacs
- IDE? ⇒ switch to spacemacs eat the bullet!
- you still can edit org-mode with notepad
Lot of things already done
- git-scm.org has plenty of resources
- git instaweb
- git daemon
- how to serve git with apaches, if you want to use another non decentralized workflow, or share hosting with a few peers
Going further: Decentralized Web
- the Internet was thought to be decentralized
- centralization of services made lot of things easy, it was fair at first
- but made us dependant and the balance is no more fair
- it is time to re-decentralize the Internet and take back control
- we shouldn't be dependant of private services
- we should pay private service, but they should adapt to us, not the other way around
Decentralized Authentication: IndieAuth
- one of your online identities = one domaine name
- serve a page with all your online identity providers and username
- but also your GPG keys (see keybase)
Mainly you OWN & CONTROL your identity and the informations about it.
Decentralized Comments: webmention
- you host your comment
- a 3rd party website can decide to show it in its comment section
- Your content is yours (prevent site death, change it, delete it…)
- Better connection:
- messages can go to all your services
- use open standards
- You are in control
- post anything, any format, no monitoring, share links.