Hi, Clément Lassieur <clem...@lassieur.org> skribis:
> Ludovic Courtès <l...@gnu.org> writes: > >> On that topic, I had an interesting discussion with Nicolas Petton of >> Emacs about patch tracking. Nicolas explained that Gitlab (free >> software) doesn’t have some of the technical defects that GitHub has; in >> particular it can rebase instead of merging, thereby helping preserve a >> linear history, and it can be dealt with “mostly” by email. Perhaps we >> could try running an instance and see what it’s like. > > According to Gitlab Documentation [0] [1], the rebase feature you are > talking about is only available in Gitlab Enterprise Edition, which is > proprietary [2]. > > The libreboot website [3] explains "what's wrong with Gitlab", I think > it is worth reading. You’re preaching to the choir. ;-) Of course I’d only be interested in running a community-controlled instance of the free software version of GitLab (“Community Edition”). If it lacks that rebase feature, that’s probably a showstopper. > The Kernel Recipes talk by Greg KH [4] about why the Linux kernel > developers rely on plain text email instead of using "modern" > development tools might be of some interest too. It'll happen in Paris > on September 28 [5]. I’m curious about that one. Thanks for your feedback, Ludo’.
