Hi Jiri!

> we have finished the review of Binary Application Record Encoding (BARE)
> Internet Draft [1][2] before requesting the publication. We welcome the
> feedback for the latest version of the draft [3].

Very nice! I'll read over it, but don't wait for me :)

> The next step is publication request to Independent Submissions Editor
> that is planned for the next week, May 11. Please, let me know if you
> plan to review the RFC I-D and need more time. I'll prolong the
> publication request date.

testing

>
> I'll set this up asap, and see where we will go from this.
>
> And yes, this will be for demotstration purposes for the time being.
>

Ok, now there at least is something to look at there:

Repo: https://git.sr.ht/~emacs/emacs
Todo: https://todo.sr.ht/~emacs/emacs
List: https://lists.sr.ht/~emacs/emacs-devel

Feel free to post things and to look at it.  We can figure out how to

>
> I'll set this up asap, and see where we will go from this.
>
> And yes, this will be for demotstration purposes for the time being.
>

Ok, now there at least is something to look at there:

Repo: https://git.sr.ht/~emacs/emacs
Todo: https://todo.sr.ht/~emacs/emacs
List: https://lists.sr.ht/~emacs/emacs-devel

Feel free to post things and to look at it.  We can figure out how to

Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net> writes:

> Theodor Thornhill <theo@thornhill.no> writes:
>
>>>
>>> So that would be something like git.sr.ht/~eliz/emacs or
>>> git.sr.ht/~lars/emacs?  This makes me wonder how "hard coded" the user
>>> names are in the sourcehut code base.  Assuming the GNU project would
>>> host its sourcehut instance on the domain git.gnu.org, srht.gnu.org,
>>> source.gnu.org, or whatever, would it still be possible to remove the
>>> "~..." username part? (I know this is as minor of an issue as it gets,
>>> it's just curiosity).
>>>
>>> Until then, it seems that the username "~gnu" is not taken.  Maybe

Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net> writes:

> Theodor Thornhill <theo@thornhill.no> writes:
>
>>>
>>> So that would be something like git.sr.ht/~eliz/emacs or
>>> git.sr.ht/~lars/emacs?  This makes me wonder how "hard coded" the user
>>> names are in the sourcehut code base.  Assuming the GNU project would
>>> host its sourcehut instance on the domain git.gnu.org, srht.gnu.org,
>>> source.gnu.org, or whatever, would it still be possible to remove the
>>> "~..." username part? (I know this is as minor of an issue as it gets,
>>> it's just curiosity).
>>>
>>> Until then, it seems that the username "~gnu" is not taken.  Maybe

Stefan Kangas <stefankangas@gmail.com> writes:

> Theodor Thornhill <theo@thornhill.no> writes:
>
>> Actually, I think that running Sourcehut as a local instance wouldn't
>> really be necessary for the evaluation, because it is the same code that
>> is running on sr.ht.  Apart from the fiddly bits with self hosting, the
>> workflow should be the same.
> [snip]
>> Of course.  However, I think that getting some sense of what _needs_ to
>> be supported before even considering sourcehut would be smart.  The self
>> hosting can come later, IMO.
>
> I might be wrong, but I suspect that we are much closer than we think.

Stefan Kangas <stefankangas@gmail.com> writes:

> Theodor Thornhill <theo@thornhill.no> writes:
>
>> Actually, I think that running Sourcehut as a local instance wouldn't
>> really be necessary for the evaluation, because it is the same code that
>> is running on sr.ht.  Apart from the fiddly bits with self hosting, the
>> workflow should be the same.
> [snip]
>> Of course.  However, I think that getting some sense of what _needs_ to
>> be supported before even considering sourcehut would be smart.  The self
>> hosting can come later, IMO.
>
> I might be wrong, but I suspect that we are much closer than we think.

>
> So that would be something like git.sr.ht/~eliz/emacs or
> git.sr.ht/~lars/emacs?  This makes me wonder how "hard coded" the user
> names are in the sourcehut code base.  Assuming the GNU project would
> host its sourcehut instance on the domain git.gnu.org, srht.gnu.org,
> source.gnu.org, or whatever, would it still be possible to remove the
> "~..." username part? (I know this is as minor of an issue as it gets,
> it's just curiosity).
>
> Until then, it seems that the username "~gnu" is not taken.  Maybe
> someone more entitled than me could mirror a few repositories over there
> for testing purposes?
>

>
> So that would be something like git.sr.ht/~eliz/emacs or
> git.sr.ht/~lars/emacs?  This makes me wonder how "hard coded" the user
> names are in the sourcehut code base.  Assuming the GNU project would
> host its sourcehut instance on the domain git.gnu.org, srht.gnu.org,
> source.gnu.org, or whatever, would it still be possible to remove the
> "~..." username part? (I know this is as minor of an issue as it gets,
> it's just curiosity).
>
> Until then, it seems that the username "~gnu" is not taken.  Maybe
> someone more entitled than me could mirror a few repositories over there
> for testing purposes?
>