From danielesassoli at gmail.com  Mon Dec  1 10:48:35 2025
From: danielesassoli at gmail.com (Daniele Sassoli)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2025 10:48:35 +0000
Subject: Adding Gerrit to the list of suggested replacements
In-Reply-To: <CADR1ei6vet75PzQRW+RGviMwsg1vfKRVNbxA2OBCzNnHPpYL8w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPd_6AsgAsPf5PGSRjdS2a9RzGwrhpQ0bx4YJ7zF1H0tfY2g+Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADR1ei7c96XMWfNYK2A1HGLwT8Gu6C7Jq+CBNez3DAK1Z3Ck9Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPd_6AvzmncA0Ed7k_wzaoB+u8Bu6rdZ2ZVJJukngv+LhWCYuA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADR1ei6vet75PzQRW+RGviMwsg1vfKRVNbxA2OBCzNnHPpYL8w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CADR1ei7WkoyjxGo80q4p0Wmpd_Y8b7_D+6fL2beWygg98QAipw@mail.gmail.com>

Hi All,

Any chance we can get Gerrit added to the list? I see the website has been
redesigned but Gerrit still hasn't been added.

Not sure if there are any reasons why Gerrit isn't there yet(political or
else).
If so, please let me know so I can try and see if there's anything I can do
to address them.

Thanks,
Dani

On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 at 14:48, Daniele Sassoli <danielesassoli at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 at 18:44, Dmitriy Rabotyagov <noonedeadpunk at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi Dmitriy
>>>
>>> On Sun, 2 Feb 2025 at 18:15, Dmitriy Rabotyagov <noonedeadpunk at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hey folks,
>>>>
>>>> I've learned about the project on the fosdem, and decided to follow up
>>>> on a proposal for adding Gerrit as a replacement:
>>>> https://www.gerritcodereview.com/
>>>>
>>> I also suggested the same a few months back[1], good to see someone else
>>> supporting this.
>>>
>>
>> Ah, good to know!
>> I raised Gerrit during the session promoting the project[4], but folks
>> seemed to misunderstood me, so decided to write a follow up email.
>>
>>
>>
>>>> Despite workflow is being slightly different from established by GitHub
>>>> standard, I think it is changed for better. For instance, it is possible to
>>>> make series of patches, each of which can be reviewed separately, what in
>>>> GitHub is not possible as will be part of one huge Pull Request.
>>>>
>>>> Gerrit is also being quite spread among so e communities. It is widely
>>>> used among Android developers, as both AOSP and Chromium are being
>>>> developed in Gerrit as well.
>>>>
>>>> Also OpenInfra foundation, Wikimedia, QT, Asterisk a heavily using
>>>> Gerrit as of today. So tooling has significant presence and usage among
>>>> FOSS projects already.
>>>>
>>>> As a CI/CD system, one of preliminary tools can be Zuul:
>>>> https://zuul-ci.org/
>>>>
>>>> While Zuul supports multiple drivers, it was written with Gerrit as
>>>> preliminary driver.
>>>>
>>>> There is also a Gerrithub, which might be useful for people to cover
>>>> "social" gap during migration from GitHub. Though gerrithub has huge
>>>> disadvantage at the moment - right now it supports only GitHub as
>>>> authentication mechanism (oauth2). Though it is technically trivial to add
>>>> another auth provider to Gerrit. So, potentially project can reach out
>>>> maintainers and introduce independent auth option to the service?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Disclaimer, I work at the company that hosts GerritHub (GerritForge[2]),
>>> we offer it as a totally free service, there aren't even paid tiers.
>>> The integration to GitHub is done via a plugin, it too open-source[3],
>>> can be installed on any instance so there's no need to use GerritHub
>>> to migrate to an on-prem Gerrit instance, you could do it directly...
>>>
>>
>> Oh, well, then it's even easier:)
>>
>> I guess what I meant, was to add one more plugin? to the public
>> deployment, to add one more Oauth2 provider, except GitHub.
>> For instance, in opendev Gerrit Ubuntu One is defined as identity
>> provider. And I'm pretty much sure it's open as well.
>> And afaik, you can have multiple ones defined? So if your company would
>> be open to the idea of adding extra oauth2 provider which is not GitHub, we
>> probably could find a decent one satisfying everyone?
>>
>
> There are other security and compliance issues to do with being the only
> hosts of that data(which at the moment we are not as everything is
> replicated to GitHub).
> Not saying this will never happen in the future, but it won't happen in
> the short term unless we find someone willing to fund that effort.
>
>
>> As, if here we are trying to promote going away from GitHub, that would
>> make total sense?
>>
>
>>
>>
>>> We also offer Enterprise support for installations that require it, but
>>> without adding any paid licence on top, we operate only on fully open-source
>>> versions of Gerrit, so yes, the community is very much alive and
>>> thriving.
>>>
>>> From other side, gerrithub completes sync of repos back to GitHub, so it
>>>> can be helpful for ppl with migration out.
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Give-Up-GitHub mailing list
>>>> Give-Up-GitHub at lists.sfconservancy.org
>>>> https://lists.sfconservancy.org/mailman/listinfo/give-up-github
>>>
>>>
>>> [1]
>>> https://lists.sfconservancy.org/pipermail/give-up-github/2025-January/000058.html
>>>
>>> [2] https://www.gerritforge.com/
>>> [3] https://gerrit.googlesource.com/plugins/github/+/master/README.md
>>>
>>
>> [4]
>> https://fosdem.org/2025/schedule/event/fosdem-2025-6153-the-growing-body-of-proprietary-infrastructure-for-foss-development-repeating-bad-history/
>>
>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sfconservancy.org/pipermail/give-up-github/attachments/20251201/f0856d98/attachment.html>