4 ms·

Why did it move to Forgejo?

bigfishrunning 1y ago
They were using an old fashioned mailing list to pass patches around, I would imagine features like pull requests and issue tracking made forgejo an attractive option
kjeldsendk 1y ago
The list seems long? https://forgejo.org/ https://forgejo.org/
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
dsissitka 1y ago
It sounds like they're still testing but there's this from https://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2025-July/346938.html https://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2025-July/346938.h...: ### July 22nd, 2025, Modernization of contributions The project is modernizing its contribution methods and switching to a software forge. We have setup a platform on [code.ffmpeg.org](https://code.ffmpeg.org/). The new process features continuous integration on all commits and merge requests, labelling for categorization, conflict resolution, and logging in via OpenID or Github. The main repository will become [code.ffmpeg.org/FFmpeg/FFmpeg](https://code.ffmpeg.org/FFmpeg/FFmpeg), with all others being mirrored to it. Users are encouraged to begin using it, effective now. Mailing lists have supported our development for nearly 25 years, but as more and more contributors started to become involved, the ratio of merged patches to total mails begun falling. Mailing lists became a source of friction, with discussions frequently stalling and uncategorized noise drowning out patches by bumping them down in inboxes. Although [patchwork.ffmpeg.org](https://patch.ffmpeg.org/) was set up to track submissions, it was less than reliable, with many patches and mails slipping though. Since its activation exactly 9 years ago, it recorded 54,476 patches, with 53,650 patches having the state of not archived. In comparison, the mailing list has had a total of 150,736 emails during the same time period. Additionally, new users have frequently encountered difficulties with mailing list development. From finding out the correct SMTP login details, configuring git send-email, new email security mechanisms interfering with mailing list operations, and finally not having a comfortable workflow to review patches. After years of discussions, and a vote, we officially announce the new platform, [code.ffmpeg.org](https://code.ffmpeg.org/), running [Forgejo](https://forgejo.org/). Documentation will be updated to reflect the change. Mailing lists will continue to be monitored, and used for project discussions and other topics better discussed elsewhere, but traffic and noise should become significantly reduced over time. Bugs/issues will be accepted on [code.ffmpeg.org](https://code.ffmpeg.org/), alongside with [trac.ffmpeg.org](https://trac.ffmpeg.org/) for the time being. We are also hoping that this will significantly reduce the amount of unmerged patches. If you submitted a patch which received no replies or conclusion, we apologize, and you are encouraged to resubmit it on the new platform.
- joshbaptiste 1y ago
  Main link should point to this ...
- rs186 1y ago
  I wish a certain open source project would take notice of the reasoning here...
  - Aurornis 1y ago
    The friction and overhead of mailing list development is seen as a feature, not a bug, for certain devs who prefer an exclusive environment. Moving to a modern platform with real collaborative development features is a mature move.
    - rs186 1y ago
      I have seen people arguing "mailing patches is better than github" more than once here on HN. I am like, whatever.
      - Aurornis 1y ago
        Some times HN comments are a time machine that reveal people stuck in the past who hate anything modern. A couple weeks back someone was arguing that websites these days are too slow. So slow that it took them minutes of waiting time to order something online. Then they revealed that they were using a computer that was nearly two decades old and didn’t even have enough RAM to meet the requirements of a modern OS and browser. “But it should work!” was their refrain.
    - layer8 1y ago
      For those with a power-user email setup geared towards mailing lists and patch handling, modern web-based platforms are a substantial usability regression.

They were using an old fashioned mailing list to pass patches around, I would imagine features like pull requests and issue tracking made forgejo an attractive option

kjeldsendk 1y ago

The list seems long? https://forgejo.org/ https://forgejo.org/

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

dsissitka 1y ago

It sounds like they're still testing but there's this from https://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2025-July/346938.html https://ffmpeg.org/pipermail/ffmpeg-devel/2025-July/346938.h...: ### July 22nd, 2025, Modernization of contributions The project is modernizing its contribution methods and switching to a software forge. We have setup a platform on [code.ffmpeg.org](https://code.ffmpeg.org/). The new process features continuous integration on all commits and merge requests, labelling for categorization, conflict resolution, and logging in via OpenID or Github. The main repository will become [code.ffmpeg.org/FFmpeg/FFmpeg](https://code.ffmpeg.org/FFmpeg/FFmpeg), with all others being mirrored to it. Users are encouraged to begin using it, effective now. Mailing lists have supported our development for nearly 25 years, but as more and more contributors started to become involved, the ratio of merged patches to total mails begun falling. Mailing lists became a source of friction, with discussions frequently stalling and uncategorized noise drowning out patches by bumping them down in inboxes. Although [patchwork.ffmpeg.org](https://patch.ffmpeg.org/) was set up to track submissions, it was less than reliable, with many patches and mails slipping though. Since its activation exactly 9 years ago, it recorded 54,476 patches, with 53,650 patches having the state of not archived. In comparison, the mailing list has had a total of 150,736 emails during the same time period. Additionally, new users have frequently encountered difficulties with mailing list development. From finding out the correct SMTP login details, configuring git send-email, new email security mechanisms interfering with mailing list operations, and finally not having a comfortable workflow to review patches. After years of discussions, and a vote, we officially announce the new platform, [code.ffmpeg.org](https://code.ffmpeg.org/), running [Forgejo](https://forgejo.org/). Documentation will be updated to reflect the change. Mailing lists will continue to be monitored, and used for project discussions and other topics better discussed elsewhere, but traffic and noise should become significantly reduced over time. Bugs/issues will be accepted on [code.ffmpeg.org](https://code.ffmpeg.org/), alongside with [trac.ffmpeg.org](https://trac.ffmpeg.org/) for the time being. We are also hoping that this will significantly reduce the amount of unmerged patches. If you submitted a patch which received no replies or conclusion, we apologize, and you are encouraged to resubmit it on the new platform.

joshbaptiste 1y ago
Main link should point to this ...
rs186 1y ago
I wish a certain open source project would take notice of the reasoning here...
- Aurornis 1y ago
  The friction and overhead of mailing list development is seen as a feature, not a bug, for certain devs who prefer an exclusive environment. Moving to a modern platform with real collaborative development features is a mature move.
  - rs186 1y ago
    I have seen people arguing "mailing patches is better than github" more than once here on HN. I am like, whatever.
    - Aurornis 1y ago
      Some times HN comments are a time machine that reveal people stuck in the past who hate anything modern. A couple weeks back someone was arguing that websites these days are too slow. So slow that it took them minutes of waiting time to order something online. Then they revealed that they were using a computer that was nearly two decades old and didn’t even have enough RAM to meet the requirements of a modern OS and browser. “But it should work!” was their refrain.
  - layer8 1y ago
    For those with a power-user email setup geared towards mailing lists and patch handling, modern web-based platforms are a substantial usability regression.