Re: we now have "lilypond" organization on GitHub

[Janek Warchoł]

2013/9/17 David Kastrup <address@hidden>:
> Now basically we have to split these into two different sets of
> requirements: Savannah does not provide accounts or services to the
> general public; its services will be restricted to actual developers.
>
> But what you list above mostly is _not_ related to participating with
> the project but rather with managing one's own repository using a
> graphical interface that just happens to be provided as a web service,
> in a similar vein to Gmail providing a web interface to handling a mail
> account.
>
> Now making people dependent on a central server for an activity better
> done locally kind of defeats the point of Git as a distributed version
> control system: it means you can't do basic work offline.

That's not my point, but i think that Urs explained what i mean pretty well.

> So the question is: what kind of tools should people have for working on
> their own repository, and what kind of tools are needed at the server
> side?  Naturally, it would appear to make sense to have some sort of
> submission mechanism.

I consider this separation to be somewhat artificial, since the most
important thing in my opinion is how contributors can interact with
the main repository.


2013/9/18 David Kastrup <address@hidden>:
> Now I am against moving our Google/Rietveld setup to GitHub,

A clarification: i definitely don't want to move our issue tracking to
github.  Google tracker is better.

> which is
> not just a proprietary platform but also has usage conditions (including
> reserving the right of deleting all your repositories and data without
> warning at a whim) that are not suitable for relying on.

Ok, i admit that i haven't noticed that they can delete user's stuff
without warning or prior notice.  This is a very serious problem.

> That does not mean that web tools are out of the question: what is the
> problem here is not as much the use of a web tool, but rather the use of
> the _Service_ of GitHub.
>
> If you take a look at things like Gitorious, we have the situation that
> we again have a basically private hosting service, but independently we
> also have an AGPLd software behind it.  That means that if we evaluated
> that software and found it would meet our purposes better than existing
> solutions, there is a reasonable chance that we can convince Savannah to
> host it.

Now we're making sense...
There's also http://gitlab.org/