Sourceforge is not really user friendly to report issues, propose pull-request and contribute to the project. I would like to know if it is possible to migrate Docutils to GitHub.
Is the script somewhere visible for others to help with? What remains to be done, for the script?
No. See the recent post to docutils-devel, as it contains personal emails etc we can't share it until we've gotten permission from everybody. That is the primary remaining thing, apart from a few questions around location of some directories (should infrastructure from the sandbox be moved into the core Docutils repo? Should web be moved into docutils/docs or somewhere else?).
If you'd like to, it's not the first step for me, but it would be good if grubert, gmilde, and AA-Turner could be added as organisation owners / the organisation transferred.
We very well may end up with a situation of a few 'blessed' mirrors (xref Günter's comment), but we haven't talked about that yet.
A
Last edit: Adam Turner 2022-06-01
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
For me, the main concern is a monopoly in the hand of a commercial
corporation.
While I am personally not a fan of GitHub and its pull request workflow
(OpenStack uses their own Gerrit and Gitea instance), it's worth noting that the
distributed nature of Git means lock in is not a huge issue as far as the code
itself is concerned. As long as someone has an up-to-date clone of the repo, you
could always move to a new home in no time. Of course you could lock yourself in
in other ways, such as through use of the issue tracker, CI (GitHub Actions),
etc. but all of these are secondary to the code and migration tooling exists for
many of these features already.
GitLab, Sourcehut, etc. all exist also if you really wanted to avoid GitHub,
however, the open core model of GitLab is problematic for some folks while the
long-term funding for things like Sourcehut is always going to be an issue (we
don't want our new "home" to disappear with minimal/no notice).
Just my 2c.
Cheers,
Stephen
Last edit: Adam Turner 2022-09-08
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
As another update, I have recently made several improvements to the draft conversion files (see [r9856] and [r9868]) that I've been working on over the last couple of weeks. I also have written to Günter (@milde) privately to resolve some other matters, relating to migrating issues and the authors map.
On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 10:40 PM Adam Turner via Docutils-develop
docutils-develop@lists.sourceforge.net wrote:
Thanks for this update. Is the script somewhere visible for others to
help with? What remains to be done, for the script?
For https://github.com/docutils/docutils - can I help? I'm happy to
put up an issue, but it would probably better come from the core
developers.
Cheers,
Matthew
Related
Commit: [r9059]
No. See the recent post to
docutils-devel, as it contains personal emails etc we can't share it until we've gotten permission from everybody. That is the primary remaining thing, apart from a few questions around location of some directories (shouldinfrastructurefrom the sandbox be moved into the core Docutils repo? Shouldwebbe moved intodocutils/docsor somewhere else?).If you'd like to, it's not the first step for me, but it would be good if
grubert,gmilde, andAA-Turnercould be added as organisation owners / the organisation transferred.We very well may end up with a situation of a few 'blessed' mirrors (xref Günter's comment), but we haven't talked about that yet.
A
Last edit: Adam Turner 2022-06-01
There is consensus to migrate to git.
There is no consensus to migrate to Github.
For me, the main concern is a monopoly in the hand of a commercial corporation.
Thank you for the offer. Sorry for the long silence.
On this point
While I am personally not a fan of GitHub and its pull request workflow
(OpenStack uses their own Gerrit and Gitea instance), it's worth noting that the
distributed nature of Git means lock in is not a huge issue as far as the code
itself is concerned. As long as someone has an up-to-date clone of the repo, you
could always move to a new home in no time. Of course you could lock yourself in
in other ways, such as through use of the issue tracker, CI (GitHub Actions),
etc. but all of these are secondary to the code and migration tooling exists for
many of these features already.
GitLab, Sourcehut, etc. all exist also if you really wanted to avoid GitHub,
however, the open core model of GitLab is problematic for some folks while the
long-term funding for things like Sourcehut is always going to be an issue (we
don't want our new "home" to disappear with minimal/no notice).
Just my 2c.
Cheers,
Stephen
Last edit: Adam Turner 2022-09-08
As an update, I have just added the draft conversion files in [r9119] to my sandbox, https://sourceforge.net/p/docutils/code/HEAD/tree/trunk/sandbox/aa-turner/git_conversion/
A
Related
Commit: [r9119]
As another update, I have recently made several improvements to the draft conversion files (see [r9856] and [r9868]) that I've been working on over the last couple of weeks. I also have written to Günter (@milde) privately to resolve some other matters, relating to migrating issues and the authors map.
A
Related
Commit: [r9856]
Commit: [r9868]