User:Novem Linguae/Essays/Pros and cons of moving a gadget to a repo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

An off-wiki code repository such as GitHub can be a big efficiency for software engineers. But it also comes with increased overhead. Here are the pros and cons as I see them.

Recommendation[edit]

  • For small gadgets with no activity, stay on wiki. Not worth the overhead of moving off-wiki
  • For big gadgets with multiple developers, needing automated tests, automated linting, etc, use GitHub for both issue tracking and pull requests.
    • The advantage of keeping the issue tracker and pull requests under the same roof is significant. Cross-linking, auto-closing tickets, etc.

Moving off-wiki[edit]

Pros[edit]

  • split a big gadget file into individual files (to be recompiled later)
  • linter
  • test suite
  • continuous integration
  • issue tracker
  • pull requests
  • Code review is easier. There is a system to leave comments regarding specific lines, mark them as resolved, etc.
  • Edit conflicts / rebase issues are handled more easily on an offsite repo. If using a wiki talk page to handle pull requests, and multiple people submit edit requests at once, it can be tricky to make sure changes don't get overwritten.
  • Git Blame - see who last touched a line of code
  • clearer who authored each patch, from a copyright and attribution perspective

Cons[edit]

  • Spinning up a test environment may require a custom script.
  • Deploying requires a custom script. Cannot be easily integrated into CI because all the GitHub Actions IPs are blocked as open proxies.
  • Danger of the off site repo getting out of sync with the onwiki code.
  • Less visibility. Can't put the repo on a wiki watchlist. Pull requests more likely to sit without getting reviews.
  • Non-developers rarely use issue trackers. They make all their posts to the talk page. So a developer has to transcribe them to the issue tracker, creating double work.

What website to use?[edit]

Has issue tracker AND pull requests[edit]

Has pull requests only[edit]

  • https://gitlab.wikimedia.org/repos/gadgets now also exists
    • 7 members
    • 0 repos
    • Per policy, the issue tracker should not be here. It should be on Phabricator instead, and GitLab only used for pull requests.
    • Has a unique CI language that is different than GitHub Actions
  • https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/dashboard/self is not really recommended for user scripts and gadgets. Wikimedia Gerrit is a better fit for MediaWiki core, extensions, and skins.
    • Benefits of gerrit is you can chain patches together, and the attention flag.
    • Drawbacks of gerrit include terrible email settings, difficult to configure CI, and big learning curve for non-wikimedia devs.

Has issue tracker only[edit]

  • Phabricator

If using GitHub for patches, should we use Phabricator for issue tracking?[edit]

This also has pros and cons.

  • Pros of Phabricator
    • Single sign on. Wikipedia folks do not need to create a new account.
    • Phabricator kanban workboards have more features than GitHub Project Boards
  • Pros of GitHub Issues
    • Can easily link issues to pull requests. So for example, merging a PR will close the corresponding issue.

Bots that post pull request activity on Phabricator[edit]

See also[edit]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Novem_Linguae/Essays/Pros_and_cons_of_moving_a_gadget_to_a_repo&oldid=1222389018"