sameersbn / sameersbn/docker-gitlab
Installation from source is different from official docs
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Shell
- Stars
- 8.1k
- Forks
- 2.1k
- Avg merge
- 17h 47m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 7
Description
The readme says:
GitLab CE is set up in the Docker image using the install from source method as documented in the the official GitLab documentation.
However, I see that the official documentation uses rake tasks to clone and install components such as gitlab-shell and workhorse. I guess it would be better to follow the official docs because installation process might change with new releases. Also, you won't need to freeze versions of components.
But maybe I miss something and the current approach is intentional?
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Compare the installation process described in the README with the official GitLab documentation, focusing on the Docker image setup and the rake tasks for cloning and installing gitlab-shell and workhorse. Determine whether the current pinned-component approach is intentional and, if it should change, update the documented process to match the intended source installation method.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- docker, shell
- Domain
- devops, infrastructure
- Issue type
- Refactor
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100