From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ng0 Subject: Re: Guix package incubator (later a channel) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 21:44:48 +0000 Message-ID: <20170206214447.llpuellztfya6px5@wasp> References: <20170206190923.GA3592@mail.thebird.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46889) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1car4F-0000T1-To for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Feb 2017 16:43:27 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1car4C-0001bB-1T for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Feb 2017 16:43:23 -0500 Received: from latitanza.investici.org ([2001:888:2000:56::19]:22841) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1car4B-0001Wl-Nm for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Feb 2017 16:43:19 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170206190923.GA3592@mail.thebird.nl> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Pjotr Prins Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org On 17-02-06 19:09:23, Pjotr Prins wrote: > Hi all, > > After yesterday's FOSDEM discussion I propose to set up a 'Guix > incubator' git tree using Gitlab. The master branch will track the > main Guix master but project can run on forked trees and branches. The > idea is to have patches prepared by new committers or by people who > simply prefer to use a web-based git environment. Each of these trees > can become a guix channel - once we have channels to support that. > > It won't hamper the normal process since ready patches still get > compiled and submitted through the mailing list (ML). In fact it may > help scale the review process by getting peer reviewers involved. The > idea is that we have an incubator environment before the ML which > allows for playful learning and tracking of patches that may (or may > not) make it into main line. I think it is very important to have a > low barrier to entry when it comes to submitting package recipes. > > Gitlab may help. I'll take the lead and maybe I'll start submitting my > own patches again ;) > > How about using http://notabug.org/? Will they be happy to host us and > is that the best place for gitlab? > > Pj. > Just a reply on the notabug question (I don't have much time otherwise): Notabug will eventually move to an instance of pagure.io, you can read about this in their own issues where I asked about some question back then (no link, sorry .. my name was 'ng0' back on there). Developing with pagure might be easier (fedora and surrounding communities) compared to the situation they describe in the issue. I started packaging pagure for this reason, which is about ~85% done (services + pagure itself left to wrap it up ... pagure itself is more or less done, just the service are needed. I'm more than happy to pass this on (could rebase the pagure patch), as I know I have taken on some tasks which would be better handled by different people :) That is in case you want to use a GuixSD as a host, otherwise you should not have many problems. -- ng0 -- https://www.inventati.org/patternsinthechaos/