Re: [RFC] Extending project standards to services linked through Vcs-*

2023-08-30 Thread Ángel
Hi Dominik On 2023-08-30 at 11:04 +0200, Dominik George wrote: > > On 2023-08-21 at 17:00 +0200, Dominik George wrote: > > > But, I want to go one step further and think about who is invited > > > to do what. If *some* people are invited to contribute through > > > the > > > VCS, and others are

Re: [RFC] Extending project standards to services linked through Vcs-*

2023-08-30 Thread Diederik de Haas
On Wednesday, 30 August 2023 18:46:38 CEST Russ Allbery wrote: > So I want to say up front that personally I think the Debian packaging for > every package in Debian should ideally have an existence on Salsa and all > maintainers should set up their personal Salsa configurations so that they >

Re: [RFC] Extending project standards to services linked through Vcs-*

2023-08-30 Thread Sam Hartman
I tend to generally agree with Russ. But I wonder if there are things we could do on a technical front Are there things we could do to remove barriers and get to a point where we can make salsa a valid contribution channel? Things like * Add a way to mirror issues from salsa to github for

Re: [RFC] Extending project standards to services linked through Vcs-*

2023-08-30 Thread Russ Allbery
Dominik George writes: > Well, the consequence of my proposal, if we take it further, would be: > If a maintainer lists their VCS in the source package, then they need to > accept people using it. And if they accept people using it, they must > ensure that everyone can do so under the same

Re: [RFC] Extending project standards to services linked through Vcs-*

2023-08-30 Thread Dominik George
Hi Ángel, > On 2023-08-21 at 17:00 +0200, Dominik George wrote: > > But, I want to go one step further and think about who is invited to > > do what. If *some* people are invited to contribute through the VCS, > > and others are not, this does not fulfill the requirement of > > equality. So, if