> On Sep 17, 2025, at 22:44, Niklas Haas via ffmpeg-devel
> <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 16 Sep 2025 10:49:00 +0200 Michael Niedermayer
> <mich...@niedermayer.cc> wrote:
>> Hi all
>>
>> 2 months ago we voted on testing Forgejo vs Gitlab, we picked and tested
>> Forgejo. And as said in that vote, (and surprisingly, i have not forgotten
>> it)
>> heres the "after testing" discussion and vote
>>
>> do we want to keep Forgejo or switch back to the ML workflow
>> (or something else)
>>
>> F. keep Forgejo as primary forge for patch/git workflow
>> M. switch back to the ML for patch/git workflow
>
> F, with strong preference.
F.
>
> I am neutral on the issue of where to have bug tracking for the time being.
>
> I am also neutral on GitLab vs ForgeJo - I think both systems have their
> strengths and weaknesses, although it appears simpler to smooth out ForgeJo's
> bugs than to modify GitLab's monolithic codebase.
Me too.
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list -- ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ffmpeg-devel-le...@ffmpeg.org
