November 17th update #97
No reviewers
circlebuilder
Gusted
Ryuno-Ki
Labels
No labels
User research - Accessibility
User research - Blocked
User research - Community
User research - Config (instance)
User research - Errors
User research - Filters
User research - Future backlog
User research - Git workflow
User research - Labels
User research - Moderation
User research - Needs input
User research - Notifications/Dashboard
User research - Rendering
User research - Repo creation
User research - Repo units
User research - Security
User research - Settings (in-app)
No milestone
No project
No assignees
4 participants
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference
forgejo/gitea-open-letter!97
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch ":main"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
@ -11,1 +11,4 @@### November 17thPreparations are made to publish Forgejo 1.18.0-rc1 as soon as Gitea 1.18.0-rc1 is released. A security team is discussed to cover both Forgejo and Codeberg. The Forgejo domain name (forgejo.org) is in the name of Codeberg e.V. at the registrar. A grant application is drafted to support Forgejo.s/is in/is registered in/We're considering to build up a security team for both, Forgejo and Codeberg.
?
It was registered in the name of oliverpool but is now in the name of Codeberg, reason why I chose to write "is in" because it was, afterwards, moved to an account in the name of Codeberg in the OVH registrar. Maybe there is a better choice of words that reflect the reality, is simple enough and does not raise an eyebrow. 🤔
@Ryuno-Ki see forgejo/meta#37
@dachary: I read the comment by @Ryuno-Ki as to @Ryuno-Ki proposed a different wording for the sentence. Maybe @Ryuno-Ki can clarify whether this was actually a question or a rephrase-proposal.
The upper line was the current version, the line below my proposal, yes.
Thanks for the clarification, I thought it was a question! Sorry for the misunderstanding.
@Ryuno-Ki the updates are in the third person and never using "we" or "our" etc. My English is not excellent and I would appreciate if you could reword "We're considering to build up a security team for both, Forgejo and Codeberg." accordingly. I must confess that I find it difficult 😅
For the sake of keeping the updates up to date I'm going to merge this. I'll update if needed.