Re: sourceforge miseries

[Jean L. <bu...@gn...>]

Hello,

I must say that not convenient and on the other
side also good, as it could at least be hosted on
GNU.

Gitlab while way better than Sourceforge is
commercial and there is again dependency with
people and future company changes. Who knows who
is going to be taken over by whom and what changes
are to come.

FSF is for free software and it is a foundation,
and has really no commercial tensions. It provides
Mercurial and it provides git.

I am voting (without voting rights) that it is
hosted on GNU servers for better marketing of
CLISP and without any advertising. CLISP is
popular part of GNU system as well.

And process may be done gradually, first mercurial
transfer to GNU servers, then gradually git if
that is deemed to be the best for developers.

On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 11:32:46AM +0200, Bruno Haible wrote:
> And no report at https://twitter.com/sfnet_ops.
> 
> This is not the first time the hg server at sourceforge is acting miserably.
> 
> To me, this increases the priority of moving the source code repository
> away from sourceforge.
> 
> We can consider the following options:
> 
>   a) Move it to savannah.gnu.org (yes, savannah supports hg, see
>      http://hg.savannah.gnu.org/hgweb/?sort=lastchange ),
> 
>   b) Convert it to git and move it to savannah.gnu.org.
> 
>   c) Convert it to git and move it to gitlab.com.
> 
> Discussion:
> 
> - Advantage of a): Less work, can be realized in a short time frame.
> 
> - Advantage of b), c): Reduce the entry barrier for young developers
>   (they all know how to use git, but hardly anyone uses mercurial).

-- 
Jean Louis