Rename repository and modules

[victoralmau]

Thinking especially in v19 I think it would be appropriate to take advantage of the migration of the modules to rename them properly, I think the right approach would be:

• github_connector: it would be renamed to git_interface. All models and field names containing “github” should be renamed to “git”. The PyGithub dependency of the module would be removed. A field (git_source) would be added (e.g. in organizations) to indicate the source (github/gitlab, etc).
• git_interface_github: The PyGithub dependency would be added and what “github_connector” currently has regarding the connection to github would be moved.
• github_connector_odoo: It would be renamed to git_interface_odoo and would only have the git_interface module dependency.

This approach would allow to add other sources and create for example a new git_interface_gitlab module that would allow to add the gitlab organizations/repositories/modules “with almost no effort” because the main logic would already be in git_interface.

For consistency with all this, a new OCA/interface-git repository (or similar) should be created to move the modules in v19 to that repository.

What do you think?

Ping @pedrobaeza

[legalsylvain]

because the main logic would already be in github_connector.

because the main logic would already be in git_connector.

I guess.

Otherwise, totaly agree with such move.

[pedrobaeza]

Yes, I think we should start renaming the repository to interface-git (the previous names remains as an alias, so no compatibility problem), then I would like to get rid of connector word, as this is not using such modules for "connecting" to GitHub, so git_interface, git_interface_odoo can be possible names.

[tarteo]

I agree with @pedrobaeza to rename it to interface-git.

[tarteo]

@victoralmau I don't think we should create a generic git_interface module. In my experience Github and Gitlab work very different for example in gitlab there is a group hierarchy where the top on is considered the organization. This is not case for Github where you only have a organization. In Github pull requests are issues, in gitlab those are separate things. In Github the Github user is included in commits but in Gitlab not.

[pedrobaeza]

Well, all that things can be tackled in an abstract way IMO. For example, organizations can have an optional parent field. The other things you mention right now are not handled in GitHub modules and are not the current goal. The idea of merging both is for using standard git to get code, previously getting basic structure (organizations and repos) from each API, and finally analyzing code the same way coming from one system or another.

[tarteo]

Okay, then a generic module can be made for the git operations, which can also include basic structure also that most git hosting platforms have. But my goal is not to pull in the code of repositories, I just want to have the issues, pull requests, and commit information.

Either way, for the meantime can we rename this repo to interface-git? So I can house the gitlab module here (OCA/server-backend#413)

[legalsylvain]

Well.

• 👍 to rename interface-github to interface-git and put all git / gitlab / github modules here. (like a verticalisation).
• not sure about abstract modules that could host generic concept. I let developpers decide if making generic things is easy / feasable / interesting. (note : I don't use anymore github modules I developped)

[tarteo]

Can we proceed with this or does it need more opinions?

[legalsylvain]

OK for me !

[madmooose]

I would appreciate that!