Re: Migrating to sourcehut - what's missing?

[Stefan Kangas]

Theodor Thornhill <theo@thornhill.no> writes:

> Is there still interest in moving over to Sourcehut for emacs
> development?

My understanding is that the answer is yes.  AFAIK, no final decision
has yet been taken, but it seems like the consensus is more or less that
sourcehut is the most likely candidate to have what we need within some
reasonable time-frame.

> I'm planning to look into this myself a little during the holidays, but
> not sure how much time I realistically can spend on this, so therefore
> this mail.  Possibly it may be useful if someone other than me wishes to
> tackle this over the holidays?  In general they are pretty responsive
> over at #sr.ht, so they might be willing to help out a little.

I would personally start with setting up a sourcehut instance with a
mirror of the Emacs source code.  This would allow you to start
experimenting with it to see how it works and what is missing.  In this
work, I would specifically compare the sourcehot workflow to what we
have now.  If you could make the instance publicly accessible, other
interested parties could help with this work more easily.

Preferably any gotchas when installing should be noted down somewhere
(e.g. sent to emacs-devel).

Next, I would start looking into those things that are still missing.
For starters, they would need to be listed and it should be ensured that
there are good feature requests on the sourcehut issue tracker.  If the
sourcehut developers are willing to implement those things then great,
otherwise it would be obviously be very useful if someone would
volunteer to start working on those things.

In all steps of the way, I would try to involve emacs-devel for further
input and feedback.