Archived
15
23
Fork
You've already forked meta
6

Process for announcing intent to move a contrib-repo #192

Open
opened 2023年03月07日 14:06:39 +01:00 by Ryuno-Ki · 0 comments
Contributor
Copy link

This is something I brought up during the governance meeting at #166 while we had time.

It resulted in forgejo/website#154 which summarises my concerns.

In general, I assumed that there would be an issue in the meta repo that announces the intent to move a repository (here https://codeberg.org/forgejo-contrib/docs) to be transferred to the forgejo organisation.

I did not expect to see a „flood" of PRs that copy-paste the content from there into the website repository.
Also, I feel sad that we will loose the history of changes discussed over in the -contrib repo this way. I would rather like to see the authors credited there.

Now you could argue that I should have paid more attention to the docs repository.
But my notification counter is still 250+ big. I don't want to add to even more pressure that affects my mental health.

As far as I can tell we don't have a formal process to transfer repositories that appear to be matured enough in our incubator org that is forgejo-contrib.

If there's some support I'd like to create an issue that creates a proposal to change that. In order to focus on it, this issue here serves as discussion.

This is something I brought up during the governance meeting at https://codeberg.org/forgejo/meta/issues/166 while we had time. It resulted in https://codeberg.org/forgejo/website/issues/154 which summarises my concerns. In general, I assumed that there would be an issue in the meta repo that announces the intent to move a repository (here https://codeberg.org/forgejo-contrib/docs) to be transferred to the forgejo organisation. I did not expect to see a „flood" of PRs that copy-paste the content from there into the website repository. Also, I feel sad that we will loose the history of changes discussed over in the -contrib repo this way. I would rather like to see the authors credited there. Now you could argue that I should have paid more attention to the docs repository. But my notification counter is still 250+ big. I don't want to add to even more pressure that affects my mental health. As far as I can tell we don't have a formal process to transfer repositories that appear to be matured enough in our incubator org that is forgejo-contrib. If there's some support I'd like to create an issue that creates a proposal to change that. In order to focus on it, this issue here serves as discussion.
Commenting is not possible because the repository is archived.
No Branch/Tag specified
readme
No results found.
Labels
Clear labels
[Decision] Building proposal(s)
We're in a decision-making process, buiding one or more proposals to address the shared aim based on the criteria
[Decision] Gathering criteria
We're in a decision-making process, gathering criteria, considerations and needs
[Decision] Integrating concerns
We're in a decision-making process, working with a proposal, trying to integrate concerns and create modifications/support such that the proposal works for everyone
Accessibility
Relates to Accessibility (a11y) of product, project and process.
Agreement proposal
Forgejo agreement proposal, following a discussion
Communication
Relates to all channels, social media, website, blog posts.
Election
Process of appointing a person into a role or team (if choosing people just for a specific one-time task, use the Entrustment label)
Entrustment
Process of choosing/approving specific people to do a critical/high-impact one-time task (if choosing people for an ongoing role/team, use the Election label)
Governance
Relates to processes, procedures and decision-making.
Meeting
An upcoming team meeting
User research - Accessibility
Requires input about accessibility features, likely involves user testing.
User research - Blocked
Do not pick as-is! We are happy if you can help, but please coordinate with ongoing redesign in this area.
User research - Community
Community features, such as discovering other people's work or otherwise feeling welcome on a Forgejo instance.
User research - Config (instance)
Instance-wide configuration, authentication and other admin-only needs.
User research - Errors
How to deal with errors in the application and write helpful error messages.
User research - Filters
How filter and search is being worked with.
User research - Future backlog
The issue might be inspiring for future design work.
User research - Git workflow
AGit, fork-based and new Git workflow, PR creation etc
User research - Labels
Active research about Labels
User research - Moderation
Moderation Featuers for Admins are undergoing active User Research
User research - Needs input
Use this label to let the User Research team know their input is requested.
User research - Notifications/Dashboard
Research on how users should know what to do next.
User research - Rendering
Text rendering, markup languages etc
User research - Repo creation
Active research about the New Repo dialog.
User research - Repo units
The repo sections, disabling them and the "Add more" button.
User research - Security
User research - Settings (in-app)
How to structure in-app settings in the future?
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
1 participant Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference
forgejo/meta#192
Reference in a new issue
forgejo/meta
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?