Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.courno...@gmail.com> writes:
> Hi Ricardo, > > Ricardo Wurmus <rek...@elephly.net> writes: > >> Vagrant Cascadian <vagr...@debian.org> writes: >> >>> The only thing clunky about this particular aspect of the workflow >>> described is the fact that the guix community (maintainers?) have >>> decided on a one patch per mail policy with a cover letter, rather than >>> submitting the patches as attachments in the initial mail. >> >> You are right. When I started contributing I actually did attach all >> patches in one email. I wonder why we stopped doing that. > > It's still allowed as far as I know. But due to missing out on > notifying team members automatically (handled by 'git send-email') and > sometimes causing issues for reviewers to apply patches, it's > understandable that 'git send-email' is the most recommended option. > >> I’ll say that many of my gripes with (the GNU instance of) Debbugs are >> due to the fact that we can’t customize it to better suit our needs — it >> is a shared resource with a complicated maintenance story. So all >> changes went into Mumi as crude workarounds. I think this is a dead end >> and we’d be better off leaving the shared GNU instance of Debbugs >> behind. > > I'd be sad to loose at least two good things from Debbugs: > > 1. It's hosted by the GNU/FSF for us. It always work, and the rare > times it doesn't, the folks in #savannah are hard at work resolving the > problems. While hosting sourcehut is probably not too difficult, keeping > it up to date (Go...) and running would be yet another weigh on our > meager sysadmin team. > > 2. Integration with Emacs. emacs-debbugs is useful. I think it's the > only successful thing we have at keeping track of old tickets and > resuming discussion or acting on these. Doesn't Magit have a generic forge integration? > I like how clean Mumi looks, compared to most forge issue trackers. I'm > not convinced by its search results (perhaps I'd need to get to know > what Xapian is).