I feel it's a contradiction that Debian relies on a non-free service, and especially that its forge is dedicated to DFSG-compliant software but forces its users to use a third-party, non-DFSG-compliant service to sign up and
to connect to it whenever they load a page.
On a less sarcastic note, I am taken aback by the fact that this
project can have a ~100 message thread proposing a DEP
"Enable true open collaboration on all Debian packages"
without either the proponents or the detractors finding the blatant
thumb on the scale in the proposal's very _title_ a cause for
embarrassment.
Sorry, but I disagree that the only true collaboration is Salsa-rich collaboration.
I also feel uncomfortable with this proposal that pushes the use of
Gitlab in the name of true collaboration.
Simon Richter started a new discussion on web/deps/dep18.mdwn: https://salsa.debian.org/dep-team/deps/-/merge_requests/8#note_512536[...]
"true open source" is marketing drivel (as is most of this document).
Please educate yourself on the political aspects of the free software movement, and why the term "open source" has a negative connotation
for many. You might also understand why building on top of an overly
complex framework that requires non-transferable knowledge to operate
is not seen as desirable for many.
Louis-Philippe Véronneau commented on a discussion on[...]
web/deps/dep18.mdwn: https://salsa.debian.org/dep-team/deps/-/merge_requests/8#note_514421
I'd propose to remove `which severely stifles the true open source
process from progressing` from that sentence. IMO it doesn't make the
point clearer and brings in additional controversy to this DEP.
Simon Richter commented on a discussion on web/deps/dep18.mdwn: https://salsa.debian.org/dep-team/deps/-/merge_requests/8#note_513638[...]
The argument against this DEP is that it doesn't take a step closer to collaboration, it just claims that what we had before was not
collaboration. Which is frankly offensive to people collaborating long
before git was introduced.
Quoting Guido Günther (@agx) (2024-08-28 11:51:44)[...]
Guido Günther commented on a discussion on web/deps/dep18.mdwn:https://salsa.debian.org/dep-team/deps/-/merge_requests/8#note_520426
Or maybe put on the tin what's inside:
"Encourage Continuous Integration and Merge Request based
Collaboration for Debian packages"
I like this suggestion a lot: I find it quite distracting that the
title implies other workflows to be "untrue", and this avoids such distraction.
Am 06.09.2024 um 18:30 schrieb Ceppo:I guess thats just wrong. I would guess for an expired token. Tokens in
Hi,
I see that Salsa requires reCAPTCHA resolution to sign up, and it
also embeds reCAPTCHA code in most or all pages - or at least so it
looks to me as an absolute Javascript ignorant.
When looking at my QA page [1] I currently notice that vcswatch runs into a "401 Unauthorized at /srv/qa.debian.org/data/vcswatch/vcswatch" for all
salsa based projects.
I guess here is a correlation.
Currently an example page [1] reports
Error: https://salsa.debian.org/api/v4/projects/hilmar%2Fwp2latex API
request failed: 401 Unauthorized at /srv/qa.debian.org/data/vcswatch/ vcswatch line 408.
But the "Debian changelog in Git:" below is recent, although the
phenomenon now exists for 1-2 weeks. So, it seems there is no issue
except the bogus error message.
Hilmar
[1] https://qa.debian.org/cgi-bin/vcswatch?package=wp2latex
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 489 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 10:31:12 |
Calls: | 9,665 |
Calls today: | 7 |
Files: | 13,711 |
Messages: | 6,167,295 |
Posted today: | 2 |