Re: Considerations on a gitlab-style forge

[Mark Wielaard <mark@klomp.org>]

Hi Claudio,

On Tue, 2024-04-09 at 09:35 +0000, Claudio Bantaloukas via Overseers
wrote:
> I recently read your emails in the binutils mailing list and, since feedback was requested, here's some.
> I miss the high level feature caleld pull requests in github and merge requests in gitlab.  For licensing reasons these two projects are not ok.
> I just saw https://sfconservancy.org/GiveUpGitHub/
> Have the overseers considered adding https://github.com/go-gitea/gitea or its fork https://forgejo.org/  ?

Sort answer, no. But that doesn't mean it cannot happen.
Longer answer is that different people have different ideas about what
a "pull-request model" precisely is. In general since most core
toolchain and developer tool projects on Sourceware are highly invested
in an email workflow we have been working on services that work best
with that. See for example the Sourceware roadmap from a couple of
years back that explains the why behind the current services:
https://gnu.wildebeest.org/blog/mjw/2022/06/22/sourceware-gnu-toolchain-infrastructure-roadmap/

Recently Tom and Jeff expressed interest in a "pull-request model"
https://inbox.sourceware.org/libc-alpha/9124eadc81726959bb775e913ce6e6aaa5e51e45.camel@klomp.org/

Maybe they can help guide us towards that model and the necessary
services to implement it. We could for example resurrect the gerrit
setup (assuming that is how people envision the "pull-request model" to
work). Or we could indeed look into other services like gitea, forgejo,
pagure or sourcehut.

Note that there is a mirror on sr.ht already that you could play with 
https://sr.ht/~sourceware/binutils-gdb/

Cheers,

Mark