Elle. Good day. On Fri, 29 Aug 2025 06:19:14 +0000 Elle <elle+xmpp-standa...@weathered-steel.dev> wrote:
> Hi Badri and Schimon, > > I have started work on porting over the > [xsf/xeps](https://codeberg.org/xsf-org/xeps) repository. At the > moment, it is just a mirror, and I have started reviewing the Github > CI workflow, and the `tools/github_auto_triage_pr.sh` script. > > There is a [codeberg-cli](https://codeberg.org/Aviac/codeberg-cli) > tool which aims to be a replacement for the `gh` tool. > > I also spent a good portion of time reviewing the current state of > the Codeberg/Forgejo implementation of the ForgeFed > (https://forgefed.org/) protocol. So far, they look to have > implemented submitting "Likes" (equivalent of GitHub stars) on > repositories from other Forgejo instances, Mastodon, and a couple > other sources. While somewhat tangential to the main porting effort, > I think contributing to ForgeFed will solve especially the issue of > maintenance burden for email-submitted PRs/Issues. > Good. I will be glad to know of further progress. Please do inform me if I can be of help. > If we want to start a MUC to discuss development / coordination, just > let me know. > > Regarding my "reproval" of the XSF, that again was not my intention. > I was making a point that even deeply technical decisions, like not > backdooring an encryption protocol, have philosophical and political > components, as well. If the usage of "apolitical" in this community > is meant to be "politically neutral", as was stated earlier in the > thread, then I understand and agree with the XSF stance to a certain > degree. > The argument being public is mostly not good. I do have arguments against concerns with XSF members and they do respond, albeit I am often not content with their responds. Hence, suggesting a system would be more workable than arguing with some of them. > However, Schimon your framing of "red" vs. "blue" political "teams" > is highly reductionist. Political, social, and ethical convictions > consist of a much more subtle and varied set of ideas. Even the idea > of political tolerance of one's ideological opposites is itself a > political position, not an "apolitical" one. That term, "apolitical", > is usually thrown around as a defense of the status quo and > entrenched power structures. Usually under the guise of being an > "enlightened", or more rational standpoint. > It was a general realization. I wanted to write a short argument. > Regardless, this is indeed a technical forum, and it was not my > intention to delve into a philosophical/political discussion. > Apologies for any derailment. > > As others have suggested, the technical and risk reduction benefits > of switching to a FOSS platform (like Codeberg + Forgejo) are enough > to speak for themselves. I have all intentions of putting in the work > to provide a proof-of-concept that the migration can be made, and > will ultimately lead to a long-term reduction in maintenance burden. > Yes. I think that your assessment is correct. Schimon > On Friday, August 29th, 2025 at 5:28 AM, Schimon Jehudah > <sch@fedora.email> wrote: > > > > > > > Badri. Good day. > > > > On Wed, 27 Aug 2025 23:36:21 +0530 > > Badri badrihi...@disroot.org wrote: > > > > > Piling on to express support for non-GitHub options. XSF related > > > pulls is more or less the only reason I'm still on GitHub. > > > > > > I have it on my bucket list to set up a "sign in with XMPP" option > > > for Forgejo and then pitch in to help the XSF host our own > > > instance, hopefully with federation implemented by that time... > > > > > > This is interesting. > > > > I guess that doing so would influence XMPP people to join. > > > > I suppose that utilizing OAuth would be of at most benefit. > > > > https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0235.xml > > > > https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0493.xml > > > > Schimon > > > > > ...but until that distant future I'd be happy with Codeberg (or an > > > email-based flow). > > > > > > ~Badr > > > > > > On 27/08/25 8:58 pm, Schimon Jehudah wrote: > > > > > > > I would want to add that I have a strong desire to collaborate > > > > over the XSF repositories, yet I am currently very reluctant to > > > > do so because of where it is currently hosted at. > > > > > > > > So the mentioned services be reasonable for me to begin to > > > > collaborate. > > > > > > > > Schimon > > > > > > > > On Wed, 27 Aug 2025 14:15:28 +0000 > > > > Elle elle+xmpp-standa...@weathered-steel.dev wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On the other side, I do acknowledge that using a CI-based > > > > > > system for contributions has its advantage. Therefore, a > > > > > > change which mentions that we also accept contributions via > > > > > > Github, outlining the existence of a CI there, would be > > > > > > acceptable to me. Codeberg exists :) As well as Sourcehut. > > > > > > > > > > My org has moved all of our projects over to Codeberg, and the > > > > > experience has been great (aside from the AI scrapebots > > > > > plaguing the internet). Their hosted Woodpecker CI is also > > > > > pretty easy to configure, with an option to host your own CI. > > > > > Federation is also in the works, so a self-hosted Forgejo > > > > > instance would be able to sync up with contributors on > > > > > Codeberg. > > > > > > > > > > Anyway, thank you for keeping the email-based workflow intact. > > > > > > > > > > All the best > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Standards mailing list -- standards@xmpp.org > > > > To unsubscribe send an email to standards-le...@xmpp.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Standards mailing list -- standards@xmpp.org > > To unsubscribe send an email to standards-le...@xmpp.org > _______________________________________________ > Standards mailing list -- standards@xmpp.org > To unsubscribe send an email to standards-le...@xmpp.org _______________________________________________ Standards mailing list -- standards@xmpp.org To unsubscribe send an email to standards-le...@xmpp.org
