Move some apps to a community project organisation

  • Hello all,

    I would like to put Stellarium app or others projects to a more community place, can it be a good candidate to move here ?
    Can it also benefit of Ubports weblate server as well as setting up the CI for click builds?

  • I'm not sure but I thought GitLab would allow you to use CI on any project. Look Dekko gitlab-ci.yml

    As per weblate, it would be great to have an instance for community project indeed. There were a try some time ago. Poeditor has some free space for open source projects.

  • @CiberSheep ubports weblate community project would be great, I have not big motivation to make my app translatable otherwise.

  • So can Stellarium be part of the family ?, and with a proper namespace too ( today it is me.lduboeuf ). As the big challenge for me was to port and make it usable for UT, i would to let it fly its way.
    As well for sfxr, drumkit, and almost all apps that i've ported, i would be pleased to leave them part of a kind of "ubports incubator" or "ubports app" organisation on gitlab.

  • @lduboeuf It's not a core app so I think it shouldn't be under that project (likewise, I think a couple of things that are there should not be there, and should be moved out separately, as they are community projects and not really under the purview of UBports Foundation).

    I don't know if it makes sense to create an organization to let anyone put projects under. We'd need a list of real benefits to everyone, particularly how it will not simply become a dumping ground of randomly ported apps that nobody wants to maintain.

  • @dobey yeah sure it can turn messy very quickly

  • But ofc, the "UT app dev community" can create its own gitlab organisation and perhaps openstore namespace and develop apps together there... I like that idea. Lets discuss which advantages it would have, to collect UT apps in a common place...(?)

  • @hummlbach yes something that can bring contributions more easily i think.
    If it allows to have translations and CI easily setup, would be nice.

  • When I read the proposition of Lionel I thought about the most popular fully featured apps.

    For me, requirements to get into this kind of repository should be something like:

    • UT app (port of existing app to UT, native app)
    • Popularity the user base should be large enough to draw developers/designers to contribute

    Of course popularity is hard to define, but I agree that some advanced apps should benefit from the visibility given by the foundation to help find people to contribute.
    I also agree with @dobey that the separation should be clear between community apps, core apps and the OS.

    Problems are who could be in charge of the gitlab, how to manage access rights, etc.
    I have very little knowledge of how it can be done.

    Meanwhile if a developer cannot continue maintaining their app, the forum is a good place to call for a new maintainer and ask for help to keep a nice project alive.

Log in to reply