Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [POLL] [VOTE] code.ffmpeg.org

[Kacper Michajlow <kasper93@gmail.com>]

On Sun, 13 Jul 2025 at 13:44, Michael Niedermayer
<michael@niedermayer.cc> wrote:
>
> Hi all
>
> Do people want Forgejo or Gitlab on code.ffmpeg.org for testing?
>
> F. code.ffmpeg.org should run Forgejo
> G. code.ffmpeg.org should run Gitlab

I cannot tell. While Forgejo looks fine on the surface, the devil is
in the details. I know GitLab and its (dis)advantages. Forgejo is
unknown to me, except from a limited look, so it's hard to make
educated guess if it will work fine.

As for the performance argument, is this something that was measured?
I agree GitLab can be slow, but what makes you believe Forgejo is
faster? Comparing videolan's GitLab without any scraping protection in
place to the test instance of ffmpeg's Forgejo is comparing apples and
oranges, they are different in size and use atm.

Also, while I understand the reluctance due to GitLab’s corporate
background, this ensures that it is maintained, supported and is
already more mature. What's the difference between a company "pulling
the plug" and Forgejo becoming unmaintained over the years, or lacking
fixes/improvements due to a lack of interest/funding? And don't give
me "Forgejo is open source, we can maintain it", I'm sure none of
ffmpeg contributors would be interested in maininging Forgejo.

That said, I think both choices would be fine. Whatever we chose it
would be adaptation to a new environment anyway. I think for basic
code/patches management both are fine, for all the stuff around that,
like CI, it's hard to say.

- Kacper
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel

To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-devel-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".