Hi Dragan, Thank you for your input.
Dragan Simic <[email protected]> writes: >> 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. > > I think people are focussing a bit too much on the need for having new > contributors, which actually may or may not prefer the GitHub-style > workflow. Assuming that by default all new contributors prefer that > kind of workflow and find the mailing lists as a huge barrier to entry > is simply a false assumption. See, I was a new contributor to quite > a few projects, and I always preferred mailing lists. > > Also, focusing too much on the new contributors and not thinking about > the already existing ones at the same time may not be the best approach > in the long run. The discussion about forge pull request workflows and issue trackers was a side discussion for the most part. I did not suggest the change because I dislike mailing lists or debbugs. I actually like both. I only suggested the switch because GNU Savannah's git repositories are frequently inaccessible, and recently very slow when they are available (10 KiB/s) [1]. I was happy with the read-only mirror, but now I cannot even 'git pull' from it. Since this has been ongoing for months, and seems to be worsening, I have mostly given up hope it will be fixed. Collin [1] https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/savannah-hackers-public/2025-09/msg00013.html
