Paladox used the git project only because of a quota limitation that meant he wasn't allowed to start another instance in the gerrit project.

I would suggest the other way around, use gerrit for gerrit as that's what it has been created for, check again how many instances are needed and how the quota settings are.

The "git" project was created for gitblit and testing rewrites afaict, and that doesn't exist anymore. So it would make more sense to me to get rid of that one.

Unless this means a lot of work.. but hopefully it doesn't because we just have to apply puppet roles and not too many live hacks?

It would be a lot of work to move from the git project (as i have a ci setup on gerrit-test) i also have jenkins-slave.

In T229703#5389131, @Dzahn wrote:

Paladox used the git project only because of a quota limitation that meant he wasn't allowed to start another instance in the gerrit project.

Interesting. Did we (cloud-services-team) block a quota increase request for that? Or was this a way to "borrow" quota from somewhere instead of asking?

I would suggest the other way around, use gerrit for gerrit as that's what it has been created for, check again how many instances are needed and how the quota settings are.

The "git" project was created for gitblit and testing rewrites afaict, and that doesn't exist anymore. So it would make more sense to me to get rid of that one.

Unless this means a lot of work.. but hopefully it doesn't because we just have to apply puppet roles and not too many live hacks?

I mostly would like to see unused projects gone and I don't care which one. :) Unused projects lead to the kind of confusion seen here where adminX in projectY spins up an instance unrelated to the project's goal "just to test something" and then it never goes away and nobody remembers why it is there and who 'owns' it. This quite often eventually leads to someone from the WMCS team spending a bunch of time to track down an owner when the instance gets busted somehow or its OS version needs to be replaced. If we were a for-profit hosting company we would just keep sending the bills and letting things ride until the checks stopped coming back, but in our gratis environment we need to purge the running but underutilized instances from the servers as often as we can to maintain capacity for active projects.

Alright, i understand. While i still think it's a bit wrong to use the name "git" for something unrelated and it will make it hard to find. (searching for gerrit will show nothing); i also don't want to make you have to recreate CI from scratch. After all it's just a name.

But most important is we don't run into the quota issue again. If it's still close to "full" and one of the former gerrit-project users wants to test something and immediately runs into that after moving that would be unfortunate.

I removed myself from the Gerrit project.

@bd808 it was a long while before i used this project (only using it earlier this year to test gerrit multi master setup), (i think the original intention was to move gerrit testing to that project (but didn't pan out as i never bothered to move gerrit-test3 to the gerrit project). The intention was never to go around quota restrictions (which i plan to ask for an increase if needed when i start re testing the multi master setup).

Though the project was created long before (so i'm not 100% sure if the original reason i gave above is correct).

+1 to what @Paladox stated, we do not need the gerrit project anymore and the dev environment is under the git project :-]

The arbitrary due date came and went with the main opposing feedback being the note from @Dzahn in T229703#5389161 that "git" does not mean the same thing as "gerrit" to him. He and others seem to agree that rebuilding the current setup into the gerrit project is unnecessary toil.

We requested a new unified project to replace this and 2 other projects at once. gerrit, git and phabricator.

If T240047 gets approved we would create new (buster) instances there and delete everything here (stretch that was upgraded in place from a jessie image).

Also i think this may have been deleted already by @Andrew recently.