Gerrit is much less complicated for me, but Gerrit will be replaced with GitLab, even if many peoples don't think that this should be done (I believe).. Eh, now, will we use and still Zuul/Jenkins for CI tests, as GitLab have this features?
Topic on Talk:GitLab consultation
A big part of the motivation in moving to GitLab is to replace the current Zuul/Jenkins infrastructure with GitLab CI, yes.
GitLab CI is a really great system, and is one of the things I'm really positive about.
@Jdforrester (WMF) - I'm not certain that assumption is true. Not that GitLab CI is really nice - it is - but that we would be using it within an initial deployment of GitLab.
One of the three main grounds listed is
easier setup and self-service of Continuous Integration configuration
… so I assumed that was still the case, but fair point. It indeed later says:
For the avoidance of doubt, continuous integration (CI) and task/project tracking are out of scope of this evaluation.
To reduce the cost (time) of migration, we do not plan to write CI-glue-ware between GitLab and Zuul/Jenkins and instead use GitLab's built in CI for any repositories moving to GitLab for code review.
Thanks for responds! I'm just playing with GitLab on test instance, so I honestly changed my mind, and I agree that this should be done, and it's great that most things will be in one place.