Re: Fw: Succesfully compiled IceCat using devuan

[Amin Bandali]

Hi,

Thanks for the reply and your points.  I will reply inline, below.

Jens Korte <address@hidden> writes:

[...]
>
> The first thing is: I prefer the git interfaces from gitlab and github.
>
> ## The interface used on savannah (cgit?) isn't clear to me:
> * Why have all tags a tar.gz file but the 68.4.1-gnu1 has no tag?

That would be because we haven’t officially released IceCat v68 yet.
Once released, the release commit will be tagged like previous releases.

> * Where do I find the git clone url? OK, I found it on
>   https://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=gnuzilla.git&view=view+git+repository
>   git://git.savannah.gnu.org/gnuzilla.git

You can also see them on https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/gnuzilla.git:

    git://git.savannah.gnu.org/gnuzilla.git
    https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/gnuzilla.git
    ssh://git.savannah.gnu.org/srv/git/gnuzilla.git

I strongly suggest using one of the latter two addresses, as the first
one uses the legacy (and insecure/unauthenticated) git:// protocol.

> * Why do I have to enter gnuzilla.git at
>   https://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/ and not just gnuzilla or
>   gnuzilla.* or gnuzilla*? Why aren't there hints for searching?
>

I suppose because the input box on https://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/
is not really a search box.  It expects you to enter the exact name of
the repo, e.g. gnuzilla.git or coreutils.git, per the example shown
above it.

I’m not sure why, but it comes down the gitweb interface (which comes by
default with git) being arcane and not too robust.  You may have better
like with cgit:

https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/   (warning: large page)

https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/?q=gnuzilla

>
> ## About content
> * Why is the head and master at 60.7.0?

That would be because I thought it would be best to start the v68 update
efforts on a separate branch.  I think it’s about time we fast-forward
master to 68, to better indicate that the project isn’t dead and is very
much being worked on.

> * Why is there a test branch with 38.3.0
>

Not sure; I’ll ask Rubén.

>
> Neither the interface is comfortable to, nor the content seems to be
> well maintained. Sorry for the cruel words, I mean it in a friendly way.
>
> Greets
>
> Jens
>

The interfaces are definitely leaner than the average “web app” today
using all sorts of different JavaScript libraries for the most basic
functionality.  For example, GitLab makes such heavy and taxing use of
JavaScript that at times it slows down my browser and computer down to a
halt.  I would personally take a simple and minimalist like cgit over
that any day.

Thanks again for the feedback.  I think the most important and most
actionable one is bringing the recent work from the 68 branch to master,
which we’ll try to do very soon.

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature