| 24 Nov 2021 |
 jochensp | I don't understand | 16:59:56 |
| jochensp | so you want the status json by default? | 17:00:17 |
 _hc | the status JSON is always generated | 17:00:20 |
| jochensp | k | 17:00:39 |
| _hc | I think I stuck it into that if options.wiki block to avoid adding more tangled code, not because I thought it was risky to include | 17:01:05 |
| _hc | the VM parsing that is | 17:01:15 |
| jochensp | will change, give me a minute | 17:01:17 |
| _hc | ok | 17:01:30 |
| _hc | but if it breaks something, I'll fix it :) | 17:02:13 |
| jochensp | :D deal | 17:02:34 |
| jochensp | _hc: done | 17:06:09 |
| _hc | it needs to be rebased, do you want to do it? | 17:13:22 |
| jochensp | coming | 17:15:57 |
| jochensp | don | 17:16:15 |
| _hc | I'll email Ciaran once its merged | 17:30:08 |
| _hc | I clicked merge | 17:30:14 |
| jochensp | thx :) | 17:31:27 |
| 25 Nov 2021 |
 proletarius101 | So the Gitlab team has escalate their perceived urgency around getting you an Ultimate license... here's the related issue: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/marketing/community-relations/opensource-program/general/-/issues/253 | 03:26:37 |
| proletarius101 | * So the Gitlab team has escalate their perceived urgency around getting us an Ultimate license... here's the related issue: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/marketing/community-relations/opensource-program/general/-/issues/253 | 03:26:49 |
 deimos | cool | 04:04:36 |
| proletarius101 | Recap: the premium part's code is publicly available, but is not licensed under an FOSS license, which, to some of our members, is controversial | 04:14:33 |
| proletarius101 | In reply to @proletarius101:matrix.org
So the Gitlab team has escalate their perceived urgency around getting us an Ultimate license... here's the related issue: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/marketing/community-relations/opensource-program/general/-/issues/253 It's literally a signature of me away, but certainly I'm not the decision maker | 04:15:26 |
 Sylvia | In reply to @proletarius101:matrix.org
Recap: the premium part's code is publicly available, but is not licensed under an FOSS license, which, to some of our members, is controversial I am mostly worried because it locks us in. If we ever have to leave official GitLab for whatever reason, it would become more difficult. And the Freenode mess showed us that no matter how much we think we will never have to... things can change fast | 07:20:12 |
| Sylvia | It is also just a bit weird for an org promoting libre software to add non-libre code to their setup | 07:20:59 |
| _hc | I think it would be manageable only if we are able to disable the proprietary features. I think in the past someone looked at it was possible. | 07:23:20 |
| _hc | proletarius101: I think you mentioned two different GitLab programs, one were we're some kind of partner or something, and another is the subscription level on gitlab.com. Is that right? | 07:23:50 |
| proletarius101 | We have 2. One is the customer service, which we already enrolled | 07:24:20 |
| proletarius101 | Another is the premium software | 07:24:28 |
| _hc | this all is too complicated to keep track of in chats, is there an issue somewhere? | 07:24:29 |
| proletarius101 | In reply to @eighthave:matrix.org
this all is too complicated to keep track of in chats, is there an issue somewhere? https://gitlab.com/fdroid/admin/-/issues/223 | 07:25:55 |
