Re: we now have "lilypond" organization on GitHub

[David Kastrup]

Janek Warchoł <address@hidden> writes:

> 2013/9/16 Janek Warchoł <address@hidden>:
>> 2013/9/16 David Kastrup <address@hidden>:
>>> Janek Warchoł <address@hidden> writes:
>>>
>>>> lol of the month!  Some time ago I've discovered a user named
>>>> 'lilypond' on GitHub, who seemed to be pretty inactive.  I thought
>>>> that it would be nice to have a github organization with this name,
>>>> and i was going to contact him... but it turned out that the account
>>>> belonged to me! LOL!
>>>
>>> What's wrong with Savannah?
>>
>> Nothing.
>
> What's wrong with GitHub, anyway?

It requires separate accounts and credentials (much more likely to be a
target for attacks), has its own "terms of service", may choose to
discontinue projects based on commercial criteria, can cause tool
lock-in and so on, relies on its own proprietary software.

We just experienced how much fun it is to rely on things like the Google
API to Rietveld: they decide to shut it down and that's it: we are far
too small to be a concern for them.  With Savannah, we have system
administrators sympathetic to our cause rather than their business
model.  And the LilyPond project is quite beyond a "don't care" size for
them.

I'm not sure what the original motivation for setting up lilypond-extra
and gub on Github might have been, but given the respective age of the
projects, it may just have been that Savannah did not offer Git at that
time (LilyPond itself has apparently been moved to Git from CVS at one
point of time).  Gub also has less of a LilyPond-only nature and thus a
different scope of potential users and contributors.

-- 
David Kastrup