Am 16.09.2013 12:50, schrieb David Kastrup:
Graham Percival <address@hidden> writes:
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 10:49:42AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
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.
All the above is true, but github also provides a nicer way for
developers to interact with git, by at least one order of
magnitude.
So the question is what we should be telling the Savannah operators to
make working on GNU projects using Git more feasible.
What about asking them to provide Gerrit as a service?
As far as I've read:
- LilyPond uses Rietveld, which isn't designed for git workflows.
- Rietveld isn't integrated in the process of getting code into
lilypond/master,
but rather an artificial detour.
- For example the issue of commit messages that are finally pushed
and don't match the reviewed code is probably related to that.
- Gerrit _is_ designed for git workflows.
- You could grant developer accounts to, say, anybody expressing serious
intentions to contribute
- These could have the right to push the Gerrit
- The core developers have the right to approve/reject proposals
as well as pushing directly to the main repo
- Approval of a patch immediately merges it into the main code base.
- This would make the way for externals' code into the main code base
more straightforward and transparent.
Urs