Hi all, On June 23, 2026 1:24:04 p.m. IST, Steve George <[email protected]> wrote: >Hi, > >Ludo authored a blog post covering our transition to Codeberg: > > https://guix.gnu.org/en/blog/2026/one-year-with-codeberg/ > >It's a big change, I wondered how we felt about it as a group? > >- Has it worked, or not, for you as a developer?
I was sending patches to <[email protected]> before the migration to Codeberg. I got commit rights just after the migration took place, so as a committer I don't have an opinion on Debbugs. But as a contributor, I like Codeberg over email. >- What's been better? 1. Sending patches of multiple commits used to require multiple steps, while with Codeberg this is positively different and same as a single commit. 2. Communication is better in Codeberg than email, for me. 3. Searching in <https://issues.guix.gnu.org> did not really work for me all the time, specically when searching for a phrase (maybe I didn't know it well), while in Codeberg searching is better and easier for me. I did not know about search filter in Forgejo, thanks to Maxim for prividing the link to its documentation. 4. I like the AGit Workflow, which is new for me, easy and well documented. Before Codeberg stopped allowing forking Guix for new users, I did not think of using AGit Workflow, but since I started using it, I am happy with it. 5. Cross-referring issues/PRs. 6. Built-in Markdown text editor (the comment message box) makes it easy for people new to Markdown. 7. Request of changes or single comments (without really "blocking"). >- What could be improved? Some improvements in Codeberg I would like to have: 1. As Hugo stated, pinned notifications does not notify new responses. Notifying them could be a great improvement. 2. As many people stated, reply in threads is missing, which could be implemented. 3. While quoting a line from "Files changed", if someone already quoted that line, and the author changed the code there and some different line is ended up being there with some mistake, I cannot quote it. This is interpreted as if the new line is what the old reviewer quoted. This needs to be addressed. 4. It looks like "Merges: !XXXX" does not automatically close a pull request, which I think needs to be fixed (if this is intended). > >For me personally I think the Git repo and PRs have been a win: I spend less >time trying to figure out how to pull down a contribution. > >The automation around CI/builds has been a loss. Thanks to everyone who worked >on the PR builder, that's great and it's really clear when you see that a PR >has been built. Branch co-ordination and the Info service is what I miss. > >The other one is that Issues are a lot worse than Debbugs. For users generally >Issues are great and it's a lot more accessible. But, it doesnn't compare to a >proper bug tracker, with a real database and interaction (here I miss email) >if you're handling a lot of bugs. Of course, Debbugs looked awful, was >difficult to use and was pretty inaccessible/annoying - but it also had a lot >of power which "as a developer" we have lost. > >Steve / Futurile > Sughosha Sughosha
