Hi, On 5/19/24 16:11, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
My concern about Gitlab is not its *additions* to existing services, but its *duplications* of core services already in Debian.
I agree, that's the key problem.The Debian archive itself is a VCS, so git-maintained packaging is also a duplication, and keeping the official VCS and git synchronized is causing additional work for developers, which is why people are opposed to having it mandated.
The Debian archive is purpose-built for packaging, while git is general-purpose, and does not exactly fit our existing workflows. The main thing it adds is collaboration without releases.
It is quite obvious we want something like that, so we need to go back to the design of the Debian system and look if we can add flows to facilitate that.
The current debate feels a lot like "we need collaboration without releases as a feature, git provides that, let's use git", but we have more requirements than that, and my feeling is that these are falling by the wayside.
...instead of lumping all those discussions into a discussion of ease of user interface for a single catch-all code forge that maybe make all those other complications go away by affecting all those questions and that way implicitly provides *some* answer to them all.
Also, there is a difference between ease of use and intuitivity. GitLab does not provide any tools that really make packaging easier. It is initially more accessible to non-maintainers, because of familiarity, but actual work happens outside of it.
Simon
Attachment:
OpenPGP_0xEBF67A846AABE354.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key
Attachment:
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature