Re: Tooling for branch workflows

[Josselin Poiret <dev@jpoiret.xyz>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1270 bytes --]

Hi Chris and Andreas,

Christopher Baines <mail@cbaines.net> writes:

> I too would like to see improved tooling for managing changes. I've been
> working on the qa-frontpage for smaller changes, but I think this can be
> extended to large changes too.
>
> [...]
>
> This is something I'd like to see too. I've been thinking about this
> already and want to spend more time working on at least making it easier
> for more people to get involved. Let me know if you have any specific
> requests!

Maybe it would be a good time to create an infrastructure/CI team, and
set some clear goals for it?  I think it might motivate people (me
included) to get more involved in GBC development if there is something
to build towards.

Also, I kind of agree with Andreas about the bus factor of Cuirass and
GBC, and wonder whether it makes sense to duplicate development effort
across both.  It seems to me that Cuirass is working properly as a
generic CI tool, but it's not super well adapted to Guix, something
which the GBC seems to be much better at.  Is replacing Cuirass by GBC
on berlin for Guix CI something that is a future goal, or is it
understood that Cuirass will be running there for the foreseeable
future?

Best,
-- 
Josselin Poiret

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 682 bytes --]