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

From: Hartmut Goebel <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2025 20:16:22 +0100

Hi,

thanks for the updated GCD. I'm in favor of it.

Anyhow, some remarks:

1) Regarding the AGit workflow discussed: This looks interesting 
(haven't tried yet). I suggest adding a section to the GCD that this 
will be documented within 30 days following acceptance of this GCD (or 
even earlier). Beside this, I'm curious whether this would be possible 
without "contributor" permissions – so everybody can submit patches this 
way.

2) Regarding the issue tracker: I support not migrating issues. Anyhow, 
i have two concerns, which OTHO can eventually be targeted in another 
GCD or two:

* We might want to migrate the patches, so they don't get lost. It would 
be interesting whether we could automatically extract the latest patch 
set and create a pull-request for it, including any cover letter 
(amended with a link to the original issue). WDYT?

* Some "basic" issues are open since long and still need to be addressed 
- or be closed. If we start using the Codeberg tracker, chances are high 
issues.guix.gnu.org (and debbugs) will go out of sight and these issues 
will get lost. Again this can be decided later on. Maybe many old issues 
could be closed anyway.

3) Regarding workflow and tagging of issues/patches: It might be worth 
giving some guidance how to tag issues in case. E.g. tagging as "won't 
fix", "invalid". etc. Again, this can be discussed after migration as 
this is unrelated to the actual migration. OTOH, if there already is 
some practice on this, you could add it to the GCD  already.

-- 
Regards
Hartmut Goebel

| Hartmut Goebel          | [email-masked]               |
| www.crazy-compilers.com | compilers which you thought are impossible |