Otto Kekäläinen <o...@debian.org> writes: > Hi all, > > I published a complete rewrite of the earlier draft as: > > https://salsa.debian.org/dep-team/deps/-/merge_requests/12 > DEP-18: Encourage Continuous Integration and Merge Request > based Collaboration for Debian packages
I think this will be more successful if you frame this as good patterns to follow for people who wish to opt-in on the premise of adopting this workflow. That framing follows other DEP's. Now it reads as a mandate for everything. Acknowledging existance of exceptions to the rules within the rules may also help to gain acceptance. I support mandating something what you propose for all Debian packages. I think we are more likely to get there in a sustainable way by incrementally converting ideas into code. Rather than to fight over what people should do, with no authority to demand people to perform the resulting decision if you happen to win it. I support going even further: I think the Debian build infrastructure should over time be moved over to Salsa pipelines. GitLab pipelines offer a lot of transparency, security and reproducability benefits compared to the current Debian buildds which in my perception operate under a "trust us we know what we are doing but we can't be bothered to be transparent about it" policy that doesn't inspire confidence in me. There is no discussion about Salsa Issues usage and how use of them relate to stuff on bugs.debian.org. I find Salsa Issues useful for internal maintainer discussions. I'm happy to receive end-user issues for the few (but increasing) end-users who are gitlab savvy. Some maintainers disable Issues in the salsa config and there is little agreement on best practices here. I think it is simplest to say that having Issues and Merge Requests enabled should be the preferred configuration of Salsa projects. /Simon
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
