In the 60th joint meeting of the CIDOC CRM and ISO/TC46/SC4/WG9 & 53rd FRBR/LRMoo SIG, the group resolved to start an issue, concerning the use of the mailing list and issues management. The suggestion is to replace their use (insofar as the model maintenance is concerned) with GitHub, and that the mailing list be used for communications (modelling questions etc) instead.
HW: GB, SH to come up with a proposal.
Bern, April 2025
Post by George Bruseker (9 September 2025)
Dear all,
Please find linked a document with homework related to issue 704. THe issue was the proposal of a modern tool for managing issues according to industry standards.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lPj9VMl4sD3yZkozsJYvYXgQ2fb1AoM8Pj3…
The discussion was taken up in the context of updating the website and general tooling upgrade. Stephen and I were tasked with coming up with a proposal for a system to handle issues in a more streamlined and standard manner which would encourage greater participation.
The linked document outlines a proposal to move our issue management to gitlab, currently already used by FORTH to manage versioning of CIDOC CRM.
One issue that is perhaps with digging into more as we consider this tool change is if it has any implications on our existing workflow for raising issues. I think probably it doesn't. It has always been the case that anyone on the list could raise an issue, but now it would be much more straighforward for them to do and for others to follow.
The document is open for all to edit and comment on. Please feel free to offer ideas and comments either here or in the doc (eventually in a publically commentable issue in gitlab hopefully!).
Best,
George
Post by Puyu Wang (9 September 2025)
Dear all,
I think this is really great.
May I ask if you are referring to GitLab.com or a self-hosted GitLab instance?
I would also like to note that GitLab.com no longer provides services for Mainland China, Macao, and Hong Kong. Anyone trying to access GitLab.com directly from these regions will be redirected to GitLab.cn. - a company called JiHu runs gitlab independently.
Many thanks.
Best,
Puyu Wang
Post by George Bruseker (9 September 2025)
Dear Puyu,
Thank you for this feedback. We are in the early stage of this discussion so it's really good to get your input and especially details like this. Personally, in other projects I only use github but this is often not looked on as a good practice in academic circles because of its business interest etc. Therefore the suggestion has been for gitlab which is already adopted by FORTH for managing aspects of CIDOC CRM versioning. The features are very comparable regarding issues etc. and the main thing is easy access for all and visibility of threads / lack of cut paste and repeat errors etc. I believe the version that FORTH uses is self hosted but we will have to wait for them to jump in and say. If it were, does that solve the problem of accessibility from mainland China or would that be a problem? (we certainly don't want to create such a barrier!)
Best,
George
Post by Dominic Oldman (10 September 2025)
It would be great if we could actually do an options appraisal rather than just single out a particular technical solution.
It would be good to just review what we want to get out of the system going forward and the people we would like it to serve - and possibly engage.
I don't know much about Gitlab and its suitability but can we start with some criteria? What is good and bad about the current system, etc.
I would contribute to this appraisal.
D
Post by George Bruseker (10 September 2025)
Dear Dominic,
Do you have another system in mind? We had a discussion in the last SIG about this, you might recall. The list serv and drupal solution is very heavy and time consuming; it is a high bar, high friction way of getting into things.
We need a light and functional solution that allows broad participation, doesn't cost money (or as little as possible since we have no funding) and is low bar access (people don't have to learn things). It should also meet the current ability to tag issues with the CRM version, class, property, cross reference issues etc.
If you know of solutions better (or just different, worth thinking about) than github / lab, please put them forward. Ears open. Or if someone wants to do wide market research, great, please do! Gitlab is suggested because our resources are limited and it has an issues system, it can easily line up. Also FORTH already uses it and it can be directly linked to releases. This is how version management tends to be done these days.
Here are other options that I know about:
Github - Linkedart uses, very successful model, everyone contributes, talks and collaborates, is commercial though (no cost to enter issues though)
Jira - heavy expensive clunky
Redmine - open source free, very clunky - FORTH has used it in the past (we assume FORTH is hosting)
Discourse - Arches uses, quite beautiful interface, but heavy setup investment, not sure about costs
I know of others but I don't think they are even in the competition. But if you have knowledge of other systems that are up to the task, please throw them into the mix and we can discuss it here and in person in Herakleion.
Best,
George
Post by Christian-Emil Ore (10 September 2025)
Dear all,
The most important thing is to have a person willing to take the responsibility of being archivist/librarian for the SIG data. The choice of technical implementation is not so important.
Best,
Christian-Emil
Post by Eleni Tsouloucha (11 September 2025)
Dear all,
It's not exactly what we're talking about, but we should remind ourselves of issue 384 (which was all about contextualizing the issues and the process agreed among SIG members, concerning the process whereby we raise and resolve issues). As much as I like the idea of anyone using the CRM being able to flag something as an issue (being a guideline, modelling concern, or application) without explicitly having to ask me to do so, some proper explanation of "the problem" at hand should at least be offered.
Ideally, we could follow the procedures we defined in 2022 (in gitlab or elsewhere).
Best,
Eleni
Post by Pavlos Fafalios (11 September 2025)
Dear all,
I think it is very difficult to decide on this unless we see it in practice. What I mean: there is a specific process of issues management, with emails, etc. Let us try to reproduce the entire process and related activities (opening a new issue, closing an issue, searching the issues, sending an email on issue opening, etc. etc.) using a "testing" GitLab repository, and then write down and discuss the pros and cons of both approaches.
George, is it easy to do this and demonstrate it during the SIG meeting? I think this unknown/unsure process is the the thing that deters people from changing their habits.
We can also discuss and collect requirements (George has already provided some, such as not losing the history) as well as risks (e.g. GitLab is suddenly bought by another company and imposes a usage fee or important limitations).
And then do the same for any other proposal.
Thoughts?
Best,
Pavlos
Post by George Bruseker (11 September 2025)
Dear pavlos,
This seems practical and an empirical way to test. I think we could arrange something like this to discuss the ins and outs and see how effective a solution like this could be.
Best
George
Post by Annaïs Guillem (15 September 2025)
Dear Pavlos, George, and all others,
I am in favor of using gitlab or any similar solution for managing the CRM issues. From the experience with the french translation group (Muriel, Raphaelle, Bertrand, and myself), it works nicely as we presented the use of gitlab for documenting the whole translation and validation workflow in another crm issue (I dont remember it's number). You might want to have a look how we managed the translation issues in regards to CRM.md files to compile the document. The continuous integration in a webpage is very light to interact with for consultation purposes. The wiki is documented for new comers about how to interact with the project. We can show our instance as example of gitlab CRM-related project that can inform this issue discussion.
In any case we won't have problem to link our gitlab instance to yours.
Best,