* remove patchworks.
@ 2016-09-25 9:30 ng0
2016-09-27 12:27 ` Ludovic Courtès
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: ng0 @ 2016-09-25 9:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: guix-devel
We have 22 pages of "open" patches. But they are not really open. I
believe almost no one uses patchworks. I did for some time, and so did
Ludovic and probably 3 more people but that's it.
When I reported some bug to patchworks upstream I was told this is
known and someone worked on it about 9 months ago but never really
finished it and was asked if I want to work on it.
Do we really use patchworks? I don't think so.
Oh look, I discovered another feature/bug: You can only have 1 address
associated with 1 person.
We have been discussing about alternatives, and that's the reason why I
started to package dependency graphs of gogs, kallithea, gitlab and
other version control packages.
Your thoughts?
--
ng0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread* Re: remove patchworks.
2016-09-25 9:30 remove patchworks ng0
@ 2016-09-27 12:27 ` Ludovic Courtès
2016-09-27 21:07 ` remove patchworks. [notes on gitlab, go-build-system, ruby] ng0
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Ludovic Courtès @ 2016-09-27 12:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ng0; +Cc: guix-devel
ng0 <ngillmann@runbox.com> skribis:
> We have 22 pages of "open" patches. But they are not really open. I
> believe almost no one uses patchworks. I did for some time, and so did
> Ludovic and probably 3 more people but that's it.
Yeah, I agree, this was experimental, and the experiment wasn’t quite
successful. We don’t need to formally “remove” the instance though; we
can eventually email the Sourceware folks asking them to do so, but no
rush IMO.
Thanks,
Ludo’.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: remove patchworks. [notes on gitlab, go-build-system, ruby]
2016-09-27 12:27 ` Ludovic Courtès
@ 2016-09-27 21:07 ` ng0
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: ng0 @ 2016-09-27 21:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ludovic Courtès; +Cc: guix-devel
Ludovic Courtès <ludo@gnu.org> writes:
> ng0 <ngillmann@runbox.com> skribis:
>
>> We have 22 pages of "open" patches. But they are not really open. I
>> believe almost no one uses patchworks. I did for some time, and so did
>> Ludovic and probably 3 more people but that's it.
>
> Yeah, I agree, this was experimental, and the experiment wasn’t quite
> successful. We don’t need to formally “remove” the instance though; we
> can eventually email the Sourceware folks asking them to do so, but no
> rush IMO.
>
> Thanks,
> Ludo’.
>
I Agree.
Regarding gitlab: if we do not want the omnibus package (we will not be
able to use this easily on guixsd anyway), we need at least a
go-build-system. I have outlined most of what I need to achieve what I
want from GuixSD[0], and go-build-system based packages and items are not
on the list. I will not work on a go-build-system, in contrast to what
I've written in an earlier message.
We need go-build-system for:
Gogs
- and its dependencies
Gitlab
- gitlab-workhorse
There's also something ruby based in the gitlab suite (gitlab-shell,
gitlab-ce) I'm currently working on gitlab-shell, but I already shift
towards handing my wip over to our ruby experts.
--
ng0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-09-27 21:07 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2016-09-25 9:30 remove patchworks ng0
2016-09-27 12:27 ` Ludovic Courtès
2016-09-27 21:07 ` remove patchworks. [notes on gitlab, go-build-system, ruby] ng0
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).