On Fri, Jan 30, 2026 at 11:52:19AM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > Hi, > > Steve George <[email protected]> skribis: > > > Widening out, what is needed for 'cuirass-bot' to become close to what QA > > did? > > Cuirass is not as good for the job as the Data Service, which is why I > described it as a stopgap more than the “ultimate” solution: > > https://codeberg.org/guix/maintenance/pulls/28 > > Notably, it’s unable to provide a good comparison of the pull request > branch vs. the target branch, something that QA does well. And it > doesn’t run ‘guix lint’, and only compiles for x86_64-linux at the > moment. (...) > … but I’d love to see QA integration with Codeberg!
Maybe this is something for y'all to discuss at Guix Days then. My impression from chatting with Chris Baines on IRC is that this isn't work that's currently happening. I don't really think this division of work makes much sense for the long-term: we have you/Romain working on Cuirass in a professional context, we have Chris working on QA/Info in a personal context - both are under resourced and kinda single-points-of-failures. I wish we could have one code-base that everyone contributed to! This is what Chris said on IRC (https://logs.guix.gnu.org/guix/2026-01-28.log): <futurile>cbaines: what's the status of getting QA back towards where you had it before? Is it do'able or are you blocked? <cbaines>it's back in the "how long is a piece of string" territory, I'm reluctant to try and bodge it to fit Codeberg, which means a bigger rethink to shape it in to something that wouldn't look out of place when used with Codeberg/GitHub <cbaines>I spent quite a bit of time trying to get/keep things working, in the hope that people getting value from QA would help make it sustainable, but that didn't work Really throwing it out there, is there nothing we can grab from another project? Steve / Futurile
