From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ng0 Subject: Re: Guix package incubator (later a channel) Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2017 20:37:16 +0000 Message-ID: <20170207203716.lwvijzs4ckn4alzu@wasp> References: <20170206190923.GA3592@mail.thebird.nl> <20170206214447.llpuellztfya6px5@wasp> <20170207054251.GA6888@mail.thebird.nl> <8760klzv1x.fsf@dustycloud.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58980) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cbCUZ-0005TQ-0R for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 15:36:01 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cbCUV-0002WW-1y for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 15:35:59 -0500 Received: from latitanza.investici.org ([2001:888:2000:56::19]:64627) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cbCUU-0002Vt-OZ for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 15:35:54 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8760klzv1x.fsf@dustycloud.org> 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: Christopher Allan Webber Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org On 17-02-07 12:59:22, Christopher Allan Webber wrote: > Pjotr Prins writes: > > > On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 09:44:48PM +0000, ng0 wrote: > >> 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. > > > > That would be a great result :). Also pagure looks very interesting - > > simpler than gitlab. I like simple. > > It does look good: > > Open data: Sources, doc, ticket and pull-requests meta-data are > available in the web interface but also in git repos which can thus be > cloned and changed locally. > > That's really appealing. > The only thing we found (not answered, but I didn't check so far with pagure development team) is that issues and pull requests are read-only git repositories. Maybe our short trip into pagure was too short to answer this, but it looked like read-only, no push. One reason why I want an local instance to play with so I can check wether my feature-issues are really issues or just pagure.io instance configuration settings. Also no trace of the "pull requests" across different hosted instance of it, but that can be solved aswell later. I agree with Pjotr, doesn't matter for now, might matter later. -- ng0 -- https://www.inventati.org/patternsinthechaos/