Re: GNOME 40 work should be done on Savannah

[Mark H Weaver <mhw@netris.org>]

Hi Léo,

Léo Le Bouter <lle-bout@zaclys.net> writes:
> I think Mark misrepresents my sayings in their messages.

I'm sorry if that happened.  It was not my intent.  Can you show me what
I wrote that misrepresents your position?

> We are ONLY using git to exchange work and collaborate on the patchset
> with Raghav, how else do you want us to work with Raghav on some git
> branch on Savannah if Raghav doesnt have commit access?

I answered essentially the same question in my last message, so I'm not
sure why you're asking again.  We've been successfully accepting
contributions from non-committers for years.

> Don't we have the right with Raghav to cooperate together on some
> patchset however we want?

Yes, of course.  To be clear: you are well within your *rights* to do
so, regardless of what anyone else thinks.

My main concerns are:

(1) The primary branch for GNOME 40 work should be on Savannah, and
    that's where we should encourage Guix developers to do this work.
    No Guix developer should be asked to work on an external site in
    order to contribute to the GNOME 40 effort.

(2) Any work that you and Raghav do on an external site should be
    _regularly_ merged into Savannah, in manageable pieces, after being
    reviewed of course.  If you do this, my concerns over review quality
    would be addressed.

(3) If changes are made on the 'wip' branch on Savannah that conflict
    with your preliminary work on an external site, it would be your
    responsibility to rebase your work as needed, just as anyone
    proposing a patch would be expected to do.  That should be an
    incentive to submit your work to Savannah early and often.

Would this be acceptable to you?

    Regards,
      Mark