Splitting this from T265617: Experiment with GitLab-Phabricator integration.
@Aklapper writes:
This task might welcome splitting between Phabricator Maniphest (task) interaction, and Phabricator Diffusion (code repository hosting) syncing.
This is a stub; more details to come (including making sure there isn't an existing task for this).
| Status | Subtype | Assigned | Task | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Open | None | T319359 GitLab integrations: the Gerrit & Jenkins integration catalog | |||
| Resolved | brennen | T265617 Experiment with GitLab-Phabricator integration | |||
| Resolved | None | T324151 GitLab repos are not correctly mirrored to Diffusion |
There is no correct mirroring currently:
Compare Phabricator Diffusion's https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/source/phabricator/history/wmf%252Fstable/src/applications/project/controller/PhabricatorProjectBoardViewController.php which lists a commit in 2019 as the last change, and https://gitlab.wikimedia.org/repos/phabricator/phabricator/-/commits/wmf/stable/src/applications/project/controller/PhabricatorProjectBoardViewController.php which lists commits from March 2023.
Do we want to sync code into Diffusion? It's a massive point of confusion for no added value. I'd rather this task was "Ensure GitLab repos are not mirrored in Diffusion".
It's a massive point of confusion for no added value.
I find it useful for the ability to embed nice links like R3254:03cff13258db: dal: Refactor and update SQL queries into tasks. The syntax needed for that is {git-hash-here} when the repo is mirrored by Diffusion. When not mirrored one can still provide explict links like https://gitlab.wikimedia.org/toolforge-repos/ifttt/-/commit/03cff13258dbb76740e19d49a4c7d25e7e75cdb8, but there is more work required to turn that into a more informative link for the casual reader like dal: Refactor and update SQL queries. As part of T296893: Replace Diffusion integration with Gitlab integration in Striker (toolsadmin) I explicitly added T317345: Mirror Striker managed GitLab repos in Diffusion for this reason.
Differential is being decommed, not Diffusion. Code review and git repos are separate things.
Would love to preserve nice embedded links.
If we can link those to the canonical host, that'd be cool. Otherwise, having diffusion monitor the canonical hosts (as now) in an option (or have canonical hosts mirror, whichever).
Re T324151#8832065 (Phabricator repos itself), I fixed that a few weeks ago at some point as part of looking into T347577.
@brennen: Apart from that, I don't know the scope of this task. Is this task still somehow useful or should it be closed in favor of T330347?
Do we still have "GitLab repos are not correctly mirrored to Diffusion"?
If so, which ones? Someone please clarify.
Not sure if there's something to still look into these days, apart from the January 2024 regression T355644: Enable git repo creation in Diffusion again?