Switch to GitHub

Developers
2011-10-11
2016-01-07
  • Nathanael Jones

    Nathanael Jones - 2011-10-11

    Hi folks, it seems that nobody has brought this up, but isn't it time to
    switch to Git and GitHub?

    FreeImage would reap great benefits from the easy branching offered by Git,
    and I suspect that it would attract a lot more code contributions by virtue of
    being visible on GitHub and the seamless nature of pull requests.

    I'd be willing to help with any migration questions or concerns.

     
  • chef_koch

    chef_koch - 2013-04-29

    I also would like to see this and if you take the help Nathanael offered you it might not need too much work for you.
    It would be great to get at least some feedback whether you are interested at all.

    Besides all the features git itself offers compared to cvs, also github's forking and creation of pull request will be a great improvement.

    The source code for the c++ lib and the .NET wrapper could be split up into separated repositories which makes forking even easier.

    Would be great to some action or discussion about this.
    Best Regards,
    Tommy

     
  • Stephen M. Webb

    Stephen M. Webb - 2013-08-11

    I'd suggest switching to git and staying at SourceForge, since SourceForge already does everything github does and a whole lot more, and all the bugs and forums and mailing list history is already at SourceForge.

     
  • Nathanael Jones

    Nathanael Jones - 2014-10-06

    Does SourceForge offer hooks to integrate with CI services drone.io and appveyor.com?

    Multi-platform continuous integration is a must-have for me. I need automated builds to react quickly to 0-days in dependencies; I can't always be sure that I can access working build VMs for every platform I support.

    GitHub, combined with CI, makes it easy to accept pull requests, as the test status for each request is updated within minutes.

    GitHub is also great for project discovery.

    It's important to keep FreeImage development somewhere 'accessible', we don't want contributions to trail off. CVS is a deal-breaker for most developers I know.

    I would love to coordinate with staff on a migration to Git (and preferably GitHub), but if they can't join the conversation, I'll go ahead and mirror to GitHub to meet my aforementioned CI needs.

     
  • Ryan Rubley

    Ryan Rubley - 2014-10-06

    GIT is basically a deal-breaker for other developers. CVS works and fulfills my needs just fine. Dealing with the cruft that is GitHub and trying to check things out just doesn't work with the projects I use FreeImage for. Stay at SourceForge!

     
  • Ryan Rubley

    Ryan Rubley - 2014-10-06

    Me, for one. Where are your "most developers you know"? Obviously not the people I know.

    I've used both CVS and Git, under Linux and Windows both. I don't need anything fancy. CVS works easier for the projects I use it for. CVS isn't dead, perhaps it just works well enough for exactly what it is intended for and doesn't have any bugs that need patching? Anyway, I don't see the point in trying to fix what isn't broke. FreeImage doesn't need GitHub in my opinion.

     
    Last edit: Ryan Rubley 2014-10-06
  • Ryan Rubley

    Ryan Rubley - 2014-10-06

    Stop trying to turn this into a pissing match. The point is that neither SourceForge nor CVS are broken by any means. Everything you've said is more or less your opinion or something completely irrelevant. It simply doesn't matter how many users a service has or where other projects are hosted. If SourceForge and CVS are working for the FreeImage developers, there is no pressing reason to change.

     
  • Nathanael Jones

    Nathanael Jones - 2014-10-06

    CVS is broken by design and lack of maintenance. SourceForge is broken by business model choice.

    How broken these things are, and how much we care about brokenness is a different thing.

    CVS is an extremely high barrier to entry for developers. It does not offer anything truly comparable to pull requests, and does not offer permalinks or acceptable source code browsing. Fundamentally, it discourages community involvement in development. As a user, and someone who wants to contribute, but cannot map his development patterns (test-driven, branch-based) onto this project, it forces me elsewhere. And you'll say "good riddance".

     
  • Nathanael Jones

    Nathanael Jones - 2014-10-07

    If you are contributor on FreeImage, and would like to have your corresponding GitHub account linked on the GitHub source mirror, please post your sf username and github username.

     
  • Viktor Szakats

    Viktor Szakats - 2015-02-24

    Came here to verify if FreeImage plans to move away from this web platform. Sourceforge served very well in the past, but recently and compared to new offerings it lacks in performance, features, discoverability, security, sustainability and lately stability. Communities largely abandoned it, and apparently the old sf.net staff as well, leaving tickets unanswered.

    It is possible to go hybrid by keeping the forums here (and maybe file distribution, though GitHub can do this also - without the CDN. For a CDN, there is bintray.com) and move everything (repo, bug-tracker, homepage) elsewhere. Even though not perfect, Google Groups works better than this forum engine.

    We did these moves in another project few years ago and they went without a hitch and turned out to be a definite success.

     
  • Nathanael Jones

    Nathanael Jones - 2015-03-23

    Our fork is here: https://github.com/imazen/freeimage

    Most of our changes will be focused on better unit tests, CI, windows support, C# wrappers, and improving scaling quality.

     
  • Scott Duensing

    Scott Duensing - 2016-01-07

    For the love of sanity, PLEASE provide git access! I don't care where!

     

Log in to post a comment.