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

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>, Arun Isaac <arunisaac <at> systemreboot.net>
Cc: 76503 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Ricardo Wurmus <rekado <at> elephly.net>, Christopher Baines <guix <at> cbaines.net>, Benjamin Slade <slade <at> lambda-y.net>
Subject: [bug#76503] [GCD] Migrating repositories, issues, and patches to Codeberg
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2025 17:35:25 +0100

Hi,

On Tue, 04 Mar 2025 at 18:26, Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org> wrote:

>> I do want to. But I didn't because I didn't want to overload your
>> personal repo with too many pull requests. Perhaps we can have a pilot
>> period (say 30 days) when both mumi/debbugs patches and codeberg pull
>> requests would be accepted methods to contribute. This may help put
>> people's minds at ease about the transition, and give them some time to
>> adapt their contribution/review worklows.
>
> Yes, having a period where both methods are accepted sounds doable.
>
> The risk is that some things would go unnoticed on one side or the
> other, and during that period we’d be effectively splitting the
> community between “those who prefer email” and “those who prefer
> Codeberg”, but if it’s limited to 30 days max, that’s probably OK.

Well, I think it’s doable to exploit Codeberg API [1].  Maybe an
implementation on Mumi side.

Somehow, it’s doable to have a tool that collects all PR submissions and
opens an issue on Debbugs side.  This issue would contain the PR message
and the link to the PR and would have a special subject.  For example,
one PR from Guix-Science [2] looks like:

    PR#87 WIP: update ghdl to 5.0.1, and add ghdl-lsp.

        Please review this submission at:

        https://codeberg.org/guix-science/guix-science/pulls/87        

        This pr updates ghdl to its most up to date release, and renames
        ghdl-clang to ghdl-llvm for consistency with upstream
        artifacts. It also fixes the two other packages affected by this
        renaming.

        Then, it adds a new package, ghdl-lsp, including the language
        server capabilities of ghdl (in addition to synthesis and
        compiler, that we already have). Updating of python-pyvhdlmodel
        and python-pytooling (see 76709) is necessary, so I set this pr
        to WIP.

Then, we could list all open issues with the subject “PR#“ and query
Codeberg via the API to have the still open PRs.  For the closed PR
ones, Mumi just sends a ’done’ control message to Debbugs.

That way, things would not go unnoticed.  And you are raising, hey the
submissions to guix-pacthes will be unnoticed by people looking only to
Codeberg.  Yes, but!  1. The aim is to move so to encourage people to go
via Codeberg.  If the submission is merged faster when open on Codeberg,
then we’ll see the natural migration. ;-)

2. In that cases, etc/teams.scm will still CC teams people so it’s a
mitigation.

This way, it would avoid “The Big Move” and would allow something more
incremental.  For example, I would prefer to have a spread team-basis
migration instead of some quick all-or-nothing migration.

Cheers,
simon

1: https://codeberg.org/api/swagger

PS: Obviously, I volunteer to contribute in the implementation of such
    bridging tools. :-)

Previous Next

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