Please switch to Github for source control
A lightweight and easy-to-use password manager
Brought to you by:
dreichl
Menu
▾
▴
#2001 Please switch to Github for source control
I implore you to switch your project to Github for source control. It makes the whole process of contributing so much easier and efficient. Not to mention that you then wouldn't be supporting a host (SourceForge) that tries to bundle adware/malware with installers.
Dominik prefers to manage code locally.
https://sourceforge.net/p/keepass/discussion/329220/thread/02383c83/?limit=25&page=1#5904
There is no bundled software in the KeePass installer.
cheers, Paul
Ok, fair enough. I didn't mean to imply that the KeePass installer bundled other software in the installer, only that SourceForge has put pressure on projects to do so.
Commercial pressure is both good and bad. Luckily it's only pressure.
cheers, Paul
SourceForge doesn't put pressure on projects. They asked me nicely whether I want to use their installer, I rejected the offer and, in contrast to other companies who offered me similar programs, they simply accepted that. Their installer program is completely optional and I don't feel any pressure to use it.
I like SourceForge and currently have no plans to switch to anything else.
Best regards,
Dominik
Yet another example of a person confusing "open source" with "crowdsourced". While Dominik welcomes contributions (in every sense of the word) from others, he has chosen to remain the sole author of the program, and the program's distribution methods reflect that. You can copy the source code, make changes, and submit those changes back to him for review, but he is still the ultimate arbiter of whether those changes get folded into the distribution, and the only person authorized to make such changes to the distribution. By its nature, KeePass is a project where too many cooks could indeed spoil the broth.
Good grief. I'm not confusing anything with anything. Nobody says you have to accept pull requests on Github. That's what it is--a "request". In fact, it makes it very easy to review potential contributions versus having to manually look at patches and such. But it's fine for the author to decide whatever he wants. I personally just don't like SourceForge much anymore, but that's just my opinion.
I'm sorry if I misinterpreted your request, but I've seen several similar requests posted here in the past, and in most of those cases, the underlying motivation for them has to do with the fact that getting outside contributions included in the base code here is neither as quick nor as simple as just posting a patch to the source tree, the way they're used to doing for other projects. In fact, many of those cases have resulted in project forks being created - most of which are listed by Dominik on his downloads page. I shouldn't be putting words in Dominik's mouth, but I don't think he has any problem with people doing this - I think he just needs to limit the scope of this project in order to ensure that the quality stays at the level he's already established for it.
Aside to the forum moderators: Why should an attempt to post a link to keepass.info cause a post to go into the "awaiting moderation" queue? Isn't there a way to whitelist URLs to avoid unnecessary moderator intervention?
Also, because of that, the post above will probably never show up on the activity page for the forum - even after the post is approved. I posted about this bug in Forge Site Support almost a year ago (#8198 - I'm avoiding linking to it here to keep this post out of the moderation queue), but apparently this bug was never passed on to the Allura maintainers. Maybe if a moderator were to complain about it directly?
If we knew that...
It only happens to some people, which is even more confusing.
cheers, Paul
Nice to know that some obscure algorithm considers me to be a sufficient PITA to require repeated moderation. ;-D