Arsen Arsenović <[email protected]> writes: > Dragan Simic <[email protected]> writes: > >> Hello all, >> >> On 2025-09-28 11:31, Arsen Arsenović wrote: >>> IMO this is a good idea. New contributors would likely find the >>> workflow easier (even though I personally like a mail-based workflow a >>> lot), we can incorporate automated testing, and Codeberg appears to be >>> ideologically aligned with the GNU project goals. >> >> Would sending patches through a mailing list disappear as an option >> after the migration to Codebeerg? I'd find that a huge step back. > > There might be no need for that for coreutils (which is relatively > simple to test - consistent and automated testing is the core benefit of > forges IMO). > > That said, it'd be good to address whatever concerns you might have with > such a switch to see if it is possible to build up improvements in > workflow.
Myself and I assume others, who may correct me if I am wrong, still like mailing lists. Therefore, I would be for keeping that as the primary way to report bugs/send patches. I don't think anyone will complain if the Codeberg interface leads to more *quality* bug reports and patches, though. Some of us track the pull requests and bugs on the GitHub mirror. But the closed history there will show a lot of spam. Collin
