On Wed, 16 Oct 2024 at 10:42, Daniel Baumann <daniel@debian.org> wrote:

On 10/16/24 18:18, Iustin Pop wrote:

Gitea/Forgejo are common recommended solutions for "home hosting", but neither is packaged.

(jftr) I'm currently working with Forgejo upstream to get one last
feature implemented that we'll need at work to switch to it, and then
finish the packaging of it in Debian. Realistically I expect the
packages to be ready by end of the year (we have local ones that need
some polishing/finishing in order to get them acceptable for Debian, as
well as a bunch of build-depends)..

..which reminded me that I forgot to take over the Forgejo RFP, done now.

Related to this I today noticed that https://forgejo.debian.net/ is up
and running, and Daniel is already using it for "production" use by
hosting his own packages there.

It would be nice to read a writeup of what you plan is, and how the Go
team or other DDs in general are expected to relate to this. Most
people are familiar with Forgejo and many have an account on e.g.
Codeberg, so I think we are in particular interested in your plan
regarding gains from Forgejo in Debian vs costs from fragmentation.
Perhaps a blog post, Debian news item or other announcement?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Hi Otto,

On 5/21/25 03:23, Otto Kekäläinen wrote:

It would be nice to read a writeup of what you plan is, and how the Go
team or other DDs in general are expected to relate to this.

I'm packaging forgejo (currently ~21 golang packages are waiting in NEW, another ~10 soon to be finished) to be eventually included in Debian.

To eat my own dogfood, I've setup forgejo.d.n and pushed my own packages
there.

Once forgejo is in Debian, I intend to keep using forgejo.d.n as a test-environment for the forgejo packages before an upload happens to
Debian, tested with my own "production data" (= my other packages hosted
on it).

your plan regarding gains from Forgejo in Debian

I don't have any plans other than to have forgejo included in Debian so
users (like myself) who want to use it, can use it from the Debian
archive instead of everyone maintaining their manual setup individually.

OIOW, one of the reasons why a lot of packages are in Debian in the
first place :)

costs from fragmentation.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean with "fragmentation" in this
context. Would you mind explaining?

Perhaps a blog post, Debian news item or other announcement?

Once forgejo is actually in Debian, I'll would like to do so, yes.

Regards,
Daniel

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Daniel Baumann wrote:

On 5/21/25 03:23, Otto KekΣlΣinen wrote:

costs from fragmentation.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean with "fragmentation" in this
context. Would you mind explaining?

Probably Otto thought you woould be going to provide <https://forgejo.debian.net/> as an alternative to salsa.

-thh

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 5/21/25 22:18, Thomas Hochstein wrote:

Probably Otto thought you would be going to provide <https://forgejo.debian.net/> as an alternative to salsa.

oh, I see. no - I absolutely don't want to do anything like that at all.

I do want to provide forgejo packages in Debian so it's available and
users can choose to use it, but I don't want to provide a forgejo
service in Debian.

Regards,
Daniel

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)