Loading policy/tpa-rfc-36-gitolite-gitweb-retirement.md +25 −10 Original line number Diff line number Diff line Loading @@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ now hosts 1,468 projects, including 888 forks, 76,244 issues, and "Maintainers", 18 "Developers", and 15 "Reporters". It stores a whopping 100 GiB of git repositories. Back when we put GitLab online, we [agreed](https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/tpa/team/-/wikis/howto/gitlab#goals) that: Back when we put GitLab online, we [agreed][] that: > It is understood that if one of those features gets used more > heavily in GitLab, the original service MUST be eventually migrated Loading @@ -49,6 +49,8 @@ Back when we put GitLab online, we [agreed](https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/tp We've been running both gitolite and GitLab in parallel for over three years now, it's time to move on. [agreed]: https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/tpa/team/-/wikis/howto/gitlab#goals ## Gitolite repository inventory snapshot As of 2023-05-11, there are 566 git repositories on cupani, 539 of Loading Loading @@ -127,11 +129,12 @@ adoption of this proposal. ### Applications team repositories In December 2022, the applications team [announced that no further updates will be pushed to Gitolite repositories](https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-project/2022-December/003518.html), and that "all In December 2022, the applications team [announced][], and that "all future code updates will only be pushed to our various gitlab.torproject.org (Gitlab) repos." [announced]: https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-project/2022-December/003518.html The following redirections will be deployed shortly: | gitolite | gitlab | fate | Loading @@ -144,7 +147,9 @@ The following redirections will be deployed shortly: | tor-launcher | tpo/applications/tor-launcher | archive | | torbutton | tpo/applications/torbutton | archive | See [tpo/tpa/team#41181](https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/tpa/team/-/issues/41181) for the ticket tracking this work. See [tpo/tpa/team#41181][] for the ticket tracking this work. [tpo/tpa/team#41181]: https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/tpa/team/-/issues/41181 ### Hooks Loading Loading @@ -328,7 +333,7 @@ One alternative that has been considered (and, indeed, has been the de-facto solution for almost three years now) is to keep Gitolite and cgit running indefinitely. In a [October 2020 tools meeting](https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/tpa/team/-/issues/40472#note_2756345), it was actually decided to In a [October 2020 tools meeting][], it was actually decided to replace Gitolite with GitLab by 2021 or 2022. The alternative of keeping both services running forever is simply not possible as it imposes too much burden on the TPA team while draining valuable Loading @@ -339,9 +344,11 @@ We want to extend a warm thank you to the good people who setup and managed those (c)git(web) and gitolite servers for all that time: thanks! [October 2020 tools meeting]: https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/tpa/team/-/issues/40472#note_2756345 ## Keeping gitolite only for problem repositories One [suggestion](https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/tpa/team/-/issues/40472#note_2756340) that was made was to keep gitolite for problematic One [suggestion][] that was made was to keep gitolite for problematic repositories and keep a mirror to avoid having to migrate those to GitLab. Loading @@ -350,6 +357,8 @@ problems. In effect, we have already implemented part of that suggestion by keeping gitolite around for so long. Now, we're actually going to find solutions to migrate those hooks into GitLab reliably. [suggestion]: https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/tpa/team/-/issues/40472#note_2756340 ## Concerns about GitLab's security During the discussions surrounding the GitLab migration, one of the Loading @@ -357,7 +366,7 @@ concerns that was raised was, in general terms, "how do we protect our code against the larger attack surface of GitLab? A summary of those discussions that happened in tpo/tpa/gitlab#36 and tpo/tpa/gitlab#81 was posted in the [Security Concerns](https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/tpa/team/-/wikis/howto/git#security-concerns) section of tpo/tpa/gitlab#81 was posted in the [Security Concerns][] section of our internal gitolite documentation. The conclusion of that discussion was: Loading @@ -365,7 +374,7 @@ The conclusion of that discussion was: > In the end, it came up to a trade-off: GitLab is much easier to > use. Convenience won over hardened security, especially considering > the cost of running two services in parallel. Or, as Nick Mathewson > [put it](https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/tpa/gitlab/-/issues/81#note_2732337): > [put it][]: > > > I'm proposing that, since this is an area where the developers would > > need to shoulder most of the burden, the development teams should be Loading @@ -376,6 +385,9 @@ The conclusion of that discussion was: > For now, the result of that discussion is a [summary of git repository > integrity solutions][mitigation strategies], which is therefore delegated to teams. [Security Concerns]: https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/tpa/team/-/wikis/howto/git#security-concerns [put it]: https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/tpa/gitlab/-/issues/81#note_2732337 ## git:// protocol redirections We do not currently support cloning repositories over the `git://` Loading Loading @@ -405,7 +417,7 @@ that purpose. ## Other forges There are many other forges around. We have used Trac in the past (see [our Trac documentation](howto/trac)) and projects like [Gitea][] or [our Trac documentation][]) and projects like [Gitea][] or [Sourcehut][] are around as well. Other than Trac, no serious evaluation of alternative Git forges was Loading @@ -419,6 +431,7 @@ requirements are not being fulfilled correctly. [Gitea]: https://gitea.io/ [Sourcehut]: https://sr.ht/ [our Trac documentation]: howto/trac # Costs Loading @@ -439,5 +452,7 @@ This proposal is currently in the `proposed` state. # References This proposal is discussed in [issue tpo/tpa/team#40472](https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/tpa/team/-/issues/40472). It is a This proposal is discussed in [issue tpo/tpa/team#40472][]. It is a long ticket and you do not need to read its entirety [issue tpo/tpa/team#40472]: https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/tpa/team/-/issues/40472 Loading
policy/tpa-rfc-36-gitolite-gitweb-retirement.md +25 −10 Original line number Diff line number Diff line Loading @@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ now hosts 1,468 projects, including 888 forks, 76,244 issues, and "Maintainers", 18 "Developers", and 15 "Reporters". It stores a whopping 100 GiB of git repositories. Back when we put GitLab online, we [agreed](https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/tpa/team/-/wikis/howto/gitlab#goals) that: Back when we put GitLab online, we [agreed][] that: > It is understood that if one of those features gets used more > heavily in GitLab, the original service MUST be eventually migrated Loading @@ -49,6 +49,8 @@ Back when we put GitLab online, we [agreed](https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/tp We've been running both gitolite and GitLab in parallel for over three years now, it's time to move on. [agreed]: https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/tpa/team/-/wikis/howto/gitlab#goals ## Gitolite repository inventory snapshot As of 2023-05-11, there are 566 git repositories on cupani, 539 of Loading Loading @@ -127,11 +129,12 @@ adoption of this proposal. ### Applications team repositories In December 2022, the applications team [announced that no further updates will be pushed to Gitolite repositories](https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-project/2022-December/003518.html), and that "all In December 2022, the applications team [announced][], and that "all future code updates will only be pushed to our various gitlab.torproject.org (Gitlab) repos." [announced]: https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-project/2022-December/003518.html The following redirections will be deployed shortly: | gitolite | gitlab | fate | Loading @@ -144,7 +147,9 @@ The following redirections will be deployed shortly: | tor-launcher | tpo/applications/tor-launcher | archive | | torbutton | tpo/applications/torbutton | archive | See [tpo/tpa/team#41181](https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/tpa/team/-/issues/41181) for the ticket tracking this work. See [tpo/tpa/team#41181][] for the ticket tracking this work. [tpo/tpa/team#41181]: https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/tpa/team/-/issues/41181 ### Hooks Loading Loading @@ -328,7 +333,7 @@ One alternative that has been considered (and, indeed, has been the de-facto solution for almost three years now) is to keep Gitolite and cgit running indefinitely. In a [October 2020 tools meeting](https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/tpa/team/-/issues/40472#note_2756345), it was actually decided to In a [October 2020 tools meeting][], it was actually decided to replace Gitolite with GitLab by 2021 or 2022. The alternative of keeping both services running forever is simply not possible as it imposes too much burden on the TPA team while draining valuable Loading @@ -339,9 +344,11 @@ We want to extend a warm thank you to the good people who setup and managed those (c)git(web) and gitolite servers for all that time: thanks! [October 2020 tools meeting]: https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/tpa/team/-/issues/40472#note_2756345 ## Keeping gitolite only for problem repositories One [suggestion](https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/tpa/team/-/issues/40472#note_2756340) that was made was to keep gitolite for problematic One [suggestion][] that was made was to keep gitolite for problematic repositories and keep a mirror to avoid having to migrate those to GitLab. Loading @@ -350,6 +357,8 @@ problems. In effect, we have already implemented part of that suggestion by keeping gitolite around for so long. Now, we're actually going to find solutions to migrate those hooks into GitLab reliably. [suggestion]: https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/tpa/team/-/issues/40472#note_2756340 ## Concerns about GitLab's security During the discussions surrounding the GitLab migration, one of the Loading @@ -357,7 +366,7 @@ concerns that was raised was, in general terms, "how do we protect our code against the larger attack surface of GitLab? A summary of those discussions that happened in tpo/tpa/gitlab#36 and tpo/tpa/gitlab#81 was posted in the [Security Concerns](https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/tpa/team/-/wikis/howto/git#security-concerns) section of tpo/tpa/gitlab#81 was posted in the [Security Concerns][] section of our internal gitolite documentation. The conclusion of that discussion was: Loading @@ -365,7 +374,7 @@ The conclusion of that discussion was: > In the end, it came up to a trade-off: GitLab is much easier to > use. Convenience won over hardened security, especially considering > the cost of running two services in parallel. Or, as Nick Mathewson > [put it](https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/tpa/gitlab/-/issues/81#note_2732337): > [put it][]: > > > I'm proposing that, since this is an area where the developers would > > need to shoulder most of the burden, the development teams should be Loading @@ -376,6 +385,9 @@ The conclusion of that discussion was: > For now, the result of that discussion is a [summary of git repository > integrity solutions][mitigation strategies], which is therefore delegated to teams. [Security Concerns]: https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/tpa/team/-/wikis/howto/git#security-concerns [put it]: https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/tpa/gitlab/-/issues/81#note_2732337 ## git:// protocol redirections We do not currently support cloning repositories over the `git://` Loading Loading @@ -405,7 +417,7 @@ that purpose. ## Other forges There are many other forges around. We have used Trac in the past (see [our Trac documentation](howto/trac)) and projects like [Gitea][] or [our Trac documentation][]) and projects like [Gitea][] or [Sourcehut][] are around as well. Other than Trac, no serious evaluation of alternative Git forges was Loading @@ -419,6 +431,7 @@ requirements are not being fulfilled correctly. [Gitea]: https://gitea.io/ [Sourcehut]: https://sr.ht/ [our Trac documentation]: howto/trac # Costs Loading @@ -439,5 +452,7 @@ This proposal is currently in the `proposed` state. # References This proposal is discussed in [issue tpo/tpa/team#40472](https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/tpa/team/-/issues/40472). It is a This proposal is discussed in [issue tpo/tpa/team#40472][]. It is a long ticket and you do not need to read its entirety [issue tpo/tpa/team#40472]: https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/tpa/team/-/issues/40472
