Re: Migrating to sourcehut - what's missing?

[john muhl]

On Tue, 2021-12-21 at 21:24 +0000, Philip Kaludercic wrote:
> Eric Abrahamsen <eric@ericabrahamsen.net> writes:
> 
> > Theodor Thornhill <theo@thornhill.no> writes:
> > 
> > > > 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.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Actually, I think that running Sourcehut as a local instance
> > > wouldn't
> > > really be necessary for the evaluation, because it is the same
> > > code that
> > > is running on sr.ht.  Apart from the fiddly bits with self
> > > hosting, the
> > > workflow should be the same.  I'd encourage people on this list
> > > getting
> > > their own user there and trying it out, as I think many already
> > > have.
> > > Specifically, emacs-devel would want to use the `meta`, `lists`,
> > > `git`,
> > > `todo` and `builds` subprojects, that is all apart from the `hg`
> > > one.
> > 
> > I wonder if it would make sense to have one of the maintainers
> > sign up
> > there and start a "pretend" official Emacs repo. They could start
> > a
> > mailing list alongside it that we could play with, and who knows,
> > maybe
> > that would eventually become the "real" official sr.ht repo.
> > 
> > Eric
> 
> So that would be something like git.sr.ht/~eliz/emacs or
> git.sr.ht/~lars/emacs?  This makes me wonder how "hard coded" the
> user
> names are in the sourcehut code base.  Assuming the GNU project
> would
> host its sourcehut instance on the domain git.gnu.org, srht.gnu.org,
> source.gnu.org, or whatever, would it still be possible to remove
> the
> "~..." username part? (I know this is as minor of an issue as it
> gets,
> it's just curiosity).
> 
> Until then, it seems that the username "~gnu" is not taken.  Maybe
> someone more entitled than me could mirror a few repositories over
> there
> for testing purposes?
> 

organizations on sourcehut are still a work in progress. Drew has
mentioned a few times that if you setup a work-around for the lack of
orgs now (e.g. a user named gnu, emacs, etc.) there will be a
migration path once the work on orgs is done. so i think the
transition from ~user to ^org is either not very important or will be
handled as support for organizations is deployed.

https://sourcehut.org/alpha-details/
https://lists.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss/%3CC0L8LGIM0C2I.3O209D1TSO6M3%40homura%3E