On 7/13/2025 11:55 PM, Philip Langdale via ffmpeg-devel wrote:
On Sun, 13 Jul 2025 13:43:57 +0200
Michael Niedermayer <mich...@niedermayer.cc> wrote:
Hi all
Do people want Forgejo or Gitlab on code.ffmpeg.org for testing?
F. code.ffmpeg.org should run Forgejo
G. code.ffmpeg.org should run Gitlab
all GA members can vote, by publically replying here with a
"F." / "Forgejo" vs "G." / "Gitlab"
End time is in 7 days unless teh community wants to extend that.
(or do people want a formal vote to be setup? on vote.ffmpeg.org)
After we decide what to run on code.ffmpeg.org, I intend to
* apply the CI patches which timo currently keeps rebasing on the
Forgejo git (maybe timo can post these to ffmpeg-devel)
* extend my github cronjob to autosync Forgejo or Gitlab too
(or someone else can set one up)
* announce code.ffmpeg.org publically so people can start submitting
and reviewing on it as an alternative to the ML
* and a month or 2 after that we can re-asses how many people use
code.ffmpeg.org and how many use the ML. Then we could decide to keep
using both in parallel or switch back to ML or just use
code.ffmpeg.org. Or in fact we could switch between Gitlab or Forgejo
here still as well.
thx
F.
I do not actually have a strong opinion, but I know Timo already got
Forgejo set up, and so we should take advantage of that.
I want to point out that I primarily set up Forgejo since I have never
done so before, while I have some limited experience with Gitlab from work.
And since I figured more people had never used Gitea/Forgejo before than
Gitlab, a test instance made sense to me.
I can set up Gitlab in the span of one evening in place of Forgejo, so
Forgejo already being there should not be a criteria.
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
