Luca Boccassi <bl...@debian.org> writes: > Yes, that's the argument - all Salsa features are bad and "bloat": > issues are bad, teams are bad, CIs are bad, merge requests are bad, the > only thing needed is to push&pull to some git backend, everything else > is bad and unneeded.
Doesn't the dgit server only accept signed tags? If I'm right about that, it seems like a very coarse collaboration boundary. I'm not sure that qualifies as push/pull in the way that you mean it. It certainly wasn't intended as a Git hosting platform, and I think it is not obviously usable as one because it was designed for a different purpose. Anyway, just to make it obvious, I don't agree with that argument, none of the dgit developers agree with it, and as I understand it neither do you. I'm not sure that anyone in the project is seriously advocating replacing Salsa with just a Git archive server; we may be exploring the implications of a straw-man position. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
