Re: [ML] Hosting of gnustep.org

[Ivan Vučica]

On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 5:40 PM H. Nikolaus Schaller <hns@goldelico.com> wrote:
> > - The code is not in the main repos
>
> It is on github: https://github.com/goldelico/swi

Footer links to https://projects.goldelico.com/p/swi/. This is fine,
but the path to contributing should be clearer.

> > - I don't have admin privileges to touch the database
> > - Even as a regular user I don't have any sort of login credentials.
>
> What do you need them for? The workflow is based on the assumption
> that everybody can openly contribute and reviewers/moderators delete
> spam.

Counterpoint: what's wrong with open reviews, where everyone can see
the pull request adding a new file, and any core contributor to the
project can approve/disapprove without going through a bespoke admin
UI? Would it be worse if every contributor could copy the entire
*dataset* of gs.org SWI at any time (something we were not doing with
code on gna.org)?

> What is the benefit of cloning it?

Archival. Survivability. See: gna.org shutdown. We'd never have moved
to Git if disaster didn't force *something* to happen. A move to Git
has also always meant we can drop Github if we choose to.

> > They're less and less of a standard these days.
>
> This is not my impression. But I may be biased.

Anecdotally: of people around me, I know only one person still happily
working on backend development in PHP.

Less anecdotally: even the largest formerly-PHP service in the world
has opted to write their own dialect, compiler and finally a bytecode
virtual machine. Additionally, widest deployed Fediverse services are
written in Ruby and Elixir respectively.