GNU bug report logs - #76503
[GCD] Migrating repositories, issues, and patches to Codeberg

Previous Next

Full log

Message #17 received at 76503 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>
To: Arun Isaac <arunisaac <at> systemreboot.net>
Cc: 76503 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Christopher Baines <guix <at> cbaines.net>,
 Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>,
 Benjamin Slade <slade <at> lambda-y.net>
Subject: Re: [GCD] Migrating repositories, issues, and patches to Codeberg
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2025 15:34:55 +0100

Hi Arun,

> GitHub invented the fork+pull-request workflow. Despite git's
> under-the-hood hardlinking magic, the pull request workflow is very
> expensive in terms of disk space.

With the AGit workflow we can open pull requests without a prior fork.
I've done this before on the Guix Science channel:

    https://codeberg.org/guix-science/guix-science/pulls/71

There is a little "AGit" tag linking to
https://forgejo.org/docs/latest/user/agit-support/

The downside of using the AGit workflow is that it requires using an
unwieldy command, but personally I find it less cumbersome than the
common pull request workflow with an extra fork, clone of the fork (or
registering of an "upstream" remote), push to the fork, then pull
request from fork to upstream.

Your points about storage limits are important, though.  We may have to
disable on-platform forks to nudge contributors to the AGit workflow.

-- 
Ricardo

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.