I want to separate some thoughts from my comment in #96 (comment) to a separate issue. I have been thinking about this recently, and I want to share my mind about this and get your thoughts.
When managing contributors from Codeberg, there is often the question about where to send patches: Forgejo or Gitea. There are also people who are "neutral" to both projects. It might seem natural to send patches to the upstream project, because it will end in the downstream project (Forgejo), too.
However, I think that this is a false assumption. It does matter where patches are reviewed!
When sending patches to Forgejo, it does not bring immediate disadvantages. Since patches are currently actively upstreamed, they also benefit Gitea users currently. This neutralizes my only argument in favour of sending patches to Gitea.
But there are further advantages:
Sending patches to Forgejo makes the review open: Instead of requiring users to log in to proprietary platforms, the review on Forgejo can be open to more contributors, while reviews in the Gitea circles actively locks out the Forgejo team members from participating. People who do not want to use Codeberg will still have the opportunity for the review when patches are being upstreamed. Also, several Gitea maintainers do have accounts on Codeberg and occasionally participate in conversations here.
Forgejo's review makes a patch pass more eyes: Due to the nature of upstreaming the PRs, having content reviewed in Forgejo first enables more eyes to have a look.
Involving Forgejo maintainers in the review enables equal rights: When patches are submitted to Forgejo, it allows the Forgejo maintainers to position themselves on a patch earlier. It is the way to give both projects equal rights in terms of review.
Get an idea about actual Forgejo contributions: Several contributions to Gitea are supported by Forgejo's work. There are people who claim to side with Forgejo, however, their activity is only visible in the form of contributions to Gitea. There are also many contributions that originate from design discussions and reported bugs in Forgejo's issue trackers. While they sometimes cross-reference the origin in the pull request description, it is not easy to identify how much human resources are available on either side. Last but not least, since many Forgejo contributions result in upstreaming attempts, more activity becomes apparent in Gitea's spaces due to the additional pull requests. Sending Forgejo conributions to Forgejo makes it visible that people are working on improving this service.
Collect comments and concerns in a central place: The Forgejo maintainers still have opinions and concerns regarding the Gitea development. They also spot problems and mistakes, but they are not able to add them to the pull request. Instead, they are often scattered in the chats, in issue comments and other places. I believe that it will be valuable to have them collected in a central place for evaluation.
This is not a call for Gitea contributors to get active in Forgejo. I respect their choice about which project to support. However, I would like to encourage everyone who is either an explicit contributor to Forgejo or "neutral" between both projects to consider becoming more active within Forgejo, because I believe that directing patches to Gitea has negative impact on Forgejo.
I want to separate some thoughts from my comment in https://codeberg.org/forgejo/discussions/issues/96#issuecomment-1505612 to a separate issue. I have been thinking about this recently, and I want to share my mind about this and get your thoughts.
When managing contributors from Codeberg, there is often the question about where to send patches: Forgejo or Gitea. There are also people who are "neutral" to both projects. It might seem natural to send patches to the upstream project, because it will end in the downstream project (Forgejo), too.
However, I think that this is a false assumption. **It does matter where** patches are reviewed!
When sending patches to Forgejo, it does not bring immediate disadvantages. Since patches are currently actively upstreamed, they also benefit Gitea users currently. This neutralizes my only argument in favour of sending patches to Gitea.
But there are further advantages:
**Sending patches to Forgejo makes the review open:** Instead of requiring users to log in to proprietary platforms, the review on Forgejo can be open to more contributors, while reviews in the Gitea circles actively locks out the Forgejo team members from participating. People who do not want to use Codeberg will still have the opportunity for the review when patches are being upstreamed. Also, several Gitea maintainers do have accounts on Codeberg and occasionally participate in conversations here.
**Forgejo's review makes a patch pass more eyes:** Due to the nature of upstreaming the PRs, having content reviewed in Forgejo first enables more eyes to have a look.
**Involving Forgejo maintainers in the review enables equal rights:** When patches are submitted to Forgejo, it allows the Forgejo maintainers to position themselves on a patch earlier. It is the way to give both projects equal rights in terms of review.
**Get an idea about actual Forgejo contributions:** Several contributions to Gitea are supported by Forgejo's work. There are people who claim to side with Forgejo, however, their activity is only visible in the form of contributions to Gitea. There are also many contributions that originate from design discussions and reported bugs in Forgejo's issue trackers. While they sometimes cross-reference the origin in the pull request description, it is not easy to identify how much human resources are available on either side. Last but not least, since many Forgejo contributions result in upstreaming attempts, more activity becomes apparent in Gitea's spaces due to the additional pull requests. Sending Forgejo conributions to Forgejo makes it visible that people are working on improving this service.
**Collect comments and concerns in a central place:** The Forgejo maintainers still have opinions and concerns regarding the Gitea development. They also spot problems and mistakes, but they are not able to add them to the pull request. Instead, they are often scattered in the chats, in issue comments and other places. I believe that it will be valuable to have them collected in a central place for evaluation.
This is not a call for Gitea contributors to get active in Forgejo. I respect their choice about which project to support. However, I would like to encourage everyone who is either an explicit contributor to Forgejo or "neutral" between both projects to consider becoming more active within Forgejo, because I believe that directing patches to Gitea has negative impact on Forgejo.