Subject: Re: [bug#76503] [GCD]

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sun, 02 Mar 2025 18:07:26 +0000

Hello Guix!

I have a question after reading most of this discussion:

Git has a 'request-pull' sub-command:

git request-pull [-p] <start> <URL> [<end>]

On the plus side, most probably, repo duplication on Codeberg would be
avoided by contributors who use the 'request-pull' sub-command
exclusively. No need for those contributors to deal with a web
interface. Most importantly, no mandatory account creation!

However, the pull request can be public while under review only if the
it is published somehow... probably in some kind of passive mailing
list.

The contributor must have his own git repository exposed at <URL>,
accessible to the official Guix committer(s), which means it won't be
convenient or feasible for everybody.

There are potential issues with the transparency of the review process,
but even if this is considered a problem, then I guess '-p' switch could
probably be made mandatory to alleviate any concerns.

There's also the question of how this would feed into your QA process, I
suppose the QA process would have to be completely unreliant on Codeberg
for 'git request-pull' to work with QA.

All in all, it couldn't replace forgejo completely without leaving aside
some contributors. However, leaving open the options to create or not
create a website account on Codeberg would be a * big * thing in that it
tackles what I personally see as the most serious objection to the GCD,
correctly identified by the initial description message, thanks for that
by the way.

Hence my question, I guess the answer is probably "no" but let's make
sure:

Might 'git request-pull' be made an option for Guix contributors in
parallel with the forgejo web process, if the GCD goes through?

Runciter