Subject: [bug#76503] [GCD] Migrating repositories, issues, and patches to Codeberg

From: Ricardo Wurmus <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2025 18:19:32 +0100

Ekaitz Zarraga <[email-masked]> writes:

> On 2025-03-04 12:22, Maxim Cournoyer wrote:
>>   - The flow would be*even*  more confusing than now, since 
>>   it'd look
>>     like Github but require committers to use it very 
>>     differently.
>
> This is a very interesting take.
> I have a similar view when we mention A-Git-Flow or whatever 
> that is.
> We would be using a tool in a very surprising way. I don't know 
> if
> that's good, at all.
>
> We would be pushing that complexity only to committers, not to
> ocasional contributors, which may help attracting people. But, 
> on the
> other hand, we would force people who is already very busy (and 
> very
> efficient with their current workflow) to discard their way to 
> do
> things and learn another.

The Github workflow is more complicated:

- fork the repository on the forge website
- clone your fork from the forge to your local machine
- checkout a new branch
- make a commit
- push the commit from your local checkout to your fork on the 
  forge
- go to the forge website to open a pull request from your fork to 
  the upstream repository

The AGit flow:

- clone the upstream repository
- checkout a new branch
- make a commit
- push the commit as a PR to the forge.

Am I overlooking something?

-- 
Ricardo