Re: Please review codeberg.org

[bill-auger]

On Sat, 09 Oct 2021 21:44:04 +1100 Yuchen wrote:
> Do you mean the reason for B0 and B2 failing are no longer true?

i dont know - i have not reviewed codeberg - it was a very long
review and was difficult to find where/how B0 or B2 were
resolved - i found one post, which indicates that B0 was
resolved, and that the wiki checklist was updated to reflect that

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/repo-criteria-discuss/2021-07/msg00016.html


On Sat, 09 Oct 2021 21:44:04 +1100 Yuchen wrote:
> I don't see changes in this, at least some scripts at codeberg.org 
> are still blocked by librejs.

the wiki checklist still indicates that it is failing though; so
there is conflicting information between the wiki and the
mailing list

what i8 remember, is that the codeberg team was working to
satisfy the 'B' criteria; and i presented it as such,
assuming that those changes were relatively simple, and could be
accomplished in the short time while waiting for final approval

now that the review was accepted and ready to publish, it is not
obvious that B0 and B2 were ever satisfied as expected - so i
suppose that codeberg should enter the list at the 'C' level,
rather than the 'B' level as proposed

if someone can demonstrate otherwise, then the wiki should be
updated - i would want to do that now; to remove this confusion
for the future