LWN: Comments on "Fedora moves towards Forgejo (Fedora Magazine)" https://lwn.net/Articles/1000751/ This is a special feed containing comments posted to the individual LWN article titled "Fedora moves towards Forgejo (Fedora Magazine)". en-us Fri, 14 Nov 2025 07:21:41 +0000 Fri, 14 Nov 2025 07:21:41 +0000 https://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification lwn@lwn.net Nod to gogs https://lwn.net/Articles/1001216/ https://lwn.net/Articles/1001216/ hmng <div class="FormattedComment"> I remember that, it's a shame it doesn't get more recognition!<br> </div> Fri, 06 Dec 2024 17:31:39 +0000 Nod to gogs https://lwn.net/Articles/1001061/ https://lwn.net/Articles/1001061/ paulj <div class="FormattedComment"> In all the articles on Forgejo, gitea, etc., it's a shame no one gives a nod and some credit to Egon Elbre, who started it and wrote much of the code - gogs.io.<br> </div> Fri, 06 Dec 2024 11:24:09 +0000 Might be a done deal. https://lwn.net/Articles/1001001/ https://lwn.net/Articles/1001001/ mattdm <div class="FormattedComment"> Yes, exactly how I see it too. Since consensus was clear when we took a straw poll, it didn't seem helpful to pretend otherwise. But we still have Project processes to follow. Those processes _do_ provide the possibility for minds to change (even if I think it very unlikely at this point).<br> <p> For whatever handful of magic beans it might be worth, only the section with "— Matthew" below it is my writing, even though the final version of the article does not clearly delineate. I think the difference in tone is simply the difference between one author who has learned to be extra-careful with definite statements in public communication, and another author more concerned with the substance of actually _doing something_. I'll let you guess who's who. :)<br> </div> Thu, 05 Dec 2024 22:36:23 +0000 Might be a done deal. https://lwn.net/Articles/1000911/ https://lwn.net/Articles/1000911/ jzb <div class="FormattedComment"> I sort of see this like a bill or nomination moving out of committee before a full vote. In all likelihood what the committee has decided is what will pass. *But* there's still two weeks (well, less now) for the larger public to give input. If another company or project that uses Pagure showed up to say "OK, we'll commit two developers to help sustain it" (or something like that) maybe it would sway the decision. Unlikely, but possible.<br> </div> Thu, 05 Dec 2024 15:42:57 +0000 Might be a done deal. https://lwn.net/Articles/1000789/ https://lwn.net/Articles/1000789/ smurf <div class="FormattedComment"> So? Decisions can be un-made if that Last Call elicits a compelling argument that wasn't seen (or heard) before.<br> </div> Thu, 05 Dec 2024 05:42:55 +0000 Might be a done deal. https://lwn.net/Articles/1000785/ https://lwn.net/Articles/1000785/ tome <div class="FormattedComment"> <span class="QuotedText">&gt; This is a big decision and we don't want it to feel rushed.</span><br> <p> Ostensibly there will be two weeks of discussion before the final decision. But oops, Miller's first sentence of the linked article tells a different story:<br> <p> <span class="QuotedText">&gt; The decision to move to Forgejo as the new git forge has been made.</span><br> </div> Thu, 05 Dec 2024 03:36:53 +0000 Sounds like good news https://lwn.net/Articles/1000769/ https://lwn.net/Articles/1000769/ intelfx <div class="FormattedComment"> Really happy for Forgejo.<br> <p> I’m not affliliated with the project, nor do I have any other sort of horse in the race, but I contributed a couple patches once and the people I interacted with have left a really nice impression.<br> </div> Wed, 04 Dec 2024 19:13:22 +0000