On 2025-01-24 10:06:13 +0100 (+0100), Julien Plissonneau Duquène wrote: > Le 2025-01-24 09:49, Gioele Barabucci a écrit : [...] > > True. This is why MR discussions should be automatically saved in git > > notes attached to the merge commit. In this way the discussion will be > > preserved and the Git repo will contain the whole development history, > > freeing Debian from an eternal dependency on Salsa/GitLab. > > In real life nobody does that. Among other issues, the discussion may > continue long after the commits are merged. Or the commits may end up never > be merged. [...]
Some code review systems do, in fact, store discussions, labels, votes, prior revisions, and other metadata as git notes, named refs and related objects. The notes are not frozen when a commit merges. Up sides to this model mean you can back up and restore all of this content just by copying repositories on disk, and highly-available clustering can be implemented through git replication alone. I work on some very large and long-lived projects that rely on one such code review system, serving as one of its community sysadmins, and it works remarkably well even if the vast majority of users have no idea their discussions are actually being stored directly in git repositories, to them it's merely an implementation detail. But yes, it really needs to be a feature of the code review system, not something managed by hand-editing notes objects; and as far as I know GitLab does not do it, so this is not particularly relevant to Debian while Salsa is running GitLab. -- Jeremy Stanley
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
