From: Andrej N. G. <an...@re...> - 2013-04-18 00:21:13
|
Hello! The sourceforge.net recently migrates to new platform named Allura. They offered to migrate earlier and now they want to migrate everyone. Unfortunately, the new platform is more toy than tool. The GIT browser is bloated and slow, still have part of information hidden. The bugtracker is simplified a lot, with 'Category' field removed (so no possibility to filter lxdm bugs from lxpanel ones and so on anymore), without a filter chooser (there is a possibility to set a filter but it requires a lot of keyboard typing and tracker inspection to set a simple filter). And that I found just by a short look, there may be some more problems. So may be we will need a migration out from sourceforge if they wouldn't leave old platform still running for selected projects. We have GIT, bugtracker, and mailing lists hosted at sourceforge. The migration of bugtracker can be a headache though. Any thoughts on this? With best wishes. Andriy. |
From: PCMan <pcm...@gm...> - 2013-04-18 03:07:09
|
For me, options are: 1. Migrate to Google code: Pros: very simple UI, fast, git repo, issue tracker (no category, only labels), wiki pages, file release management. Can use google groups for discussions. Cons: since Google code is not related to Google+ or mobile, the service might be terminated unexpectedly someday. That's the fate of Google services that do not make money. 2. Migrate to github: Pros: fast, nice git repo management. Cons: no issue traker, no mailing list, no other things our projects will need. Only the git repo is good. 3. Keep sourceforge and move the git repos to github. Pros: still having the issue trackers and mailing lists, and we can use better git code browser and others. Cons: I'm not sure if this violates the user agreement of sf.net. IIRC, it has some restrictions on this. The most applicable option seems to be #1, but after seeing what happens to Google Reader, Google Code Search, and other dead services, I'm not that sure. Since Chromium is using Google Code, I guess Google code will not be terminated, but who knows? Just my two cents On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 8:20 AM, Andrej N. Gritsenko <an...@re...> wrote: > Hello! > > The sourceforge.net recently migrates to new platform named Allura. > They offered to migrate earlier and now they want to migrate everyone. > Unfortunately, the new platform is more toy than tool. The GIT browser is > bloated and slow, still have part of information hidden. The bugtracker > is simplified a lot, with 'Category' field removed (so no possibility to > filter lxdm bugs from lxpanel ones and so on anymore), without a filter > chooser (there is a possibility to set a filter but it requires a lot of > keyboard typing and tracker inspection to set a simple filter). And that > I found just by a short look, there may be some more problems. So may be > we will need a migration out from sourceforge if they wouldn't leave old > platform still running for selected projects. We have GIT, bugtracker, > and mailing lists hosted at sourceforge. The migration of bugtracker can > be a headache though. > > Any thoughts on this? > > With best wishes. > Andriy. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Precog is a next-generation analytics platform capable of advanced > analytics on semi-structured data. The platform includes APIs for building > apps and a phenomenal toolset for data science. Developers can use > our toolset for easy data analysis & visualization. Get a free account! > http://www2.precog.com/precogplatform/slashdotnewsletter > _______________________________________________ > Pcmanfm-develop mailing list > Pcm...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pcmanfm-develop |
From: Martin B. / b. <br...@bs...> - 2013-07-09 11:57:40
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2013-04-18 05:07, PCMan wrote: > 1. Migrate to Google code: Pros: very simple UI, fast, git repo, > issue tracker (no category, only labels), wiki pages, file release > management. Can use google groups for discussions. Cons: since > Google code is not related to Google+ or mobile, the service might > be terminated unexpectedly someday. That's the fate of Google > services that do not make money. In a later email you mentioned the need for downloadable files. Google Code does not support that anymore. Can not say that I am overly impressed with what I have seen but I haven't really worked with the system. > 2. Migrate to github: Pros: fast, nice git repo management. Cons: > no issue traker, no mailing list, no other things our projects will > need. Only the git repo is good. Same as above with regards to downloadable files. The cons is strange though. You do have a issue list thing. I remember it as very slim and not very good but still, maybe it have shaped up since. > 3. Keep sourceforge and move the git repos to github. Pros: still > having the issue trackers and mailing lists, and we can use better > git code browser and others. Cons: I'm not sure if this violates > the user agreement of sf.net. IIRC, it has some restrictions on > this. I can not see any reason at all that we should stay at SF. /ANY/ http://sourceforge.net/export/ On 2013-04-18 05:58, Sharon Kimble wrote: > or 4. Self-host, with your own git repo, your own bug tracker, and > mailman for your mailing lists. Yes, it could be tough to set up > but the benefits in the long term would be great. Not very bothering or troublesome really. I have done this with both Trac and Redmine for project hosting and mailman for mails and gitosis for the git ssh stuff. For selfhosting there are more than we can handle to evaluate, I have some ideas and others have theirs. A first decision is probably to choose "hosted" or "inhouse". The "inhouse" option is plauged with the question, "who would host it?" I would also like to propose to look at http://www.gitorious.org, it's pretty much github but also a good citizen as they open source the platform. - -- brother http://sis.bthstudent.se -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJR2/qsAAoJEJbdSEaj0jV70RkIAJggmTR6tc4X9SSfGfj/MubF Xjm4TDG21L8hBHOdH1dctDvTrTBJS2FPH2hPxQXK2dGkHx9lZ6KR/JynjJq7RV5r N2khbDooDcjmgc87nUE8cpPDILqfG/siRIJqUhUJLfDFqxmh5Dfxq/wJt5Bq3w0a mTKX2K4NgYmBx6nENvOQXPqycQQ7AD4HsfKpFYvRIQHwNRNNlO/1EgIEZqv5oYi6 /QkeJSpfNscKX+L+kGFOzktsWGrIG0F7XIKzYdKlqF11xDFS2+XGzzDopygOCKK6 O1bw+Xu57r4GUmtQK5/n4Hk6Fsu9qlwTnf5/xwUruy9+VyR6Uwt1ZmIEJAD+yTE= =kcnS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
From: Stephan S. <gma...@sp...> - 2013-04-18 03:34:33
|
As a user, you have my vote in favour of migrating the bug tracker. ...preferably to something based on Bugzilla or JIRA or to GitHub or BitBucket. If possible, please avoid MantisBT and Trac. I remember finding the former annoying (though not as much as SourceForge) and I could never trust the latter to protect my e-mail from spammers. Both Bugzilla and JIRA support the kind of detail you'd want. I don't know about BitBucket's custom JIRA instance though. I don't even report bugs on SourceForge trackers anymore because my time is valuable and I have such strong and consistent memories of: 1. Fiddling with an awkward system that makes it much harder than it needs to be to add new attachments and has strange gotchas. 2. Having every bug I ever filed get closed, not by the developers, but by SourceForge's "Your bug is old. We're auto-closing it." cronjob. 3. Getting confusing e-mails which waste my time forcing me to: 3.1. Double-check that the e-mail isn't a non-optional "for your records" copy of something I posted. 3.2. Muddle through the ugly "1+meta, n, n-1, n-2, ..., 3, 2"-ordered thread dump so I can just read the one bit I care about: What changed since last time. I did talk to someone from SourceForge and they're apparently fine with having a project split between SF.net and another host like GitHub or BitBucket. (Apparently OAuth integration with such sites is already on their roadmap.) On 13-04-17 08:20 PM, Andrej N. Gritsenko wrote: > Hello! > > The sourceforge.net recently migrates to new platform named Allura. > They offered to migrate earlier and now they want to migrate everyone. > Unfortunately, the new platform is more toy than tool. The GIT browser is > bloated and slow, still have part of information hidden. The bugtracker > is simplified a lot, with 'Category' field removed (so no possibility to > filter lxdm bugs from lxpanel ones and so on anymore), without a filter > chooser (there is a possibility to set a filter but it requires a lot of > keyboard typing and tracker inspection to set a simple filter). And that > I found just by a short look, there may be some more problems. So may be > we will need a migration out from sourceforge if they wouldn't leave old > platform still running for selected projects. We have GIT, bugtracker, > and mailing lists hosted at sourceforge. The migration of bugtracker can > be a headache though. > > Any thoughts on this? > > With best wishes. > Andriy. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Precog is a next-generation analytics platform capable of advanced > analytics on semi-structured data. The platform includes APIs for building > apps and a phenomenal toolset for data science. Developers can use > our toolset for easy data analysis & visualization. Get a free account! > http://www2.precog.com/precogplatform/slashdotnewsletter > |
From: Andrej N. G. <an...@re...> - 2013-04-18 16:02:38
|
Hello! Sharon Kimble has written on Thursday, 18 April, at 4:58: >On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 11:07:02 +0800 >PCMan <pcm...@gm...> wrote: >> For me, options are: >> 1. Migrate to Google code: >> Pros: very simple UI, fast, git repo, issue tracker (no category, only >> labels), wiki pages, file release management. Can use google groups >> for discussions. >> Cons: since Google code is not related to Google+ or mobile, the >> service might be terminated unexpectedly someday. That's the fate of >> Google services that do not make money. Google code doesn't use SSH therefore password may be send in plain text over HTTP(S), that may be considered a security hole. >> 2. Migrate to github: >> Pros: fast, nice git repo management. >> Cons: no issue traker, no mailing list, no other things our projects >> will need. Only the git repo is good. Well, it is not so good. The git repo browser at github is kinda bloated as well. It is otherwise bloated than Allura but still it is, for example there is no 'shortlog' commit list with easy links, it is somewhat giantic (in comparison with GitWeb shortlog) and requires few pages loading to get what is available with single click in shortlog. >> 3. Keep sourceforge and move the git repos to github. >> Pros: still having the issue trackers and mailing lists, and we can >> use better git code browser and others. No, only mailing lists are available but I'm not sure if it's available without a project or we should have non-functional project mirrors at SF for that. The issue tracker is hardly usable for us in Allura and that is the main problem. So this is not an option. >or 4. Self-host, with your own git repo, your own bug tracker, and >mailman for your mailing lists. Yes, it could be tough to set up but >the benefits in the long term would be great. I have skills to setup those things so I could offer my help. And I think this is the best choise but it brings up hosting question. >Sharon. With best wishes. Andriy. |
From: PCMan <pcm...@gm...> - 2013-04-18 17:26:03
|
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 12:02 AM, Andrej N. Gritsenko <an...@re...> wrote: > Hello! > > Sharon Kimble has written on Thursday, 18 April, at 4:58: >>On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 11:07:02 +0800 >>PCMan <pcm...@gm...> wrote: >>> For me, options are: >>> 1. Migrate to Google code: >>> Pros: very simple UI, fast, git repo, issue tracker (no category, only >>> labels), wiki pages, file release management. Can use google groups >>> for discussions. >>> Cons: since Google code is not related to Google+ or mobile, the >>> service might be terminated unexpectedly someday. That's the fate of >>> Google services that do not make money. > > Google code doesn't use SSH therefore password may be send in plain > text over HTTP(S), that may be considered a security hole. > >>> 2. Migrate to github: >>> Pros: fast, nice git repo management. >>> Cons: no issue traker, no mailing list, no other things our projects >>> will need. Only the git repo is good. > > Well, it is not so good. The git repo browser at github is kinda > bloated as well. It is otherwise bloated than Allura but still it is, > for example there is no 'shortlog' commit list with easy links, it is > somewhat giantic (in comparison with GitWeb shortlog) and requires few > pages loading to get what is available with single click in shortlog. > >>> 3. Keep sourceforge and move the git repos to github. >>> Pros: still having the issue trackers and mailing lists, and we can >>> use better git code browser and others. > > No, only mailing lists are available but I'm not sure if it's > available without a project or we should have non-functional project > mirrors at SF for that. The issue tracker is hardly usable for us in > Allura and that is the main problem. So this is not an option. > >>or 4. Self-host, with your own git repo, your own bug tracker, and >>mailman for your mailing lists. Yes, it could be tough to set up but >>the benefits in the long term would be great. > > I have skills to setup those things so I could offer my help. And I > think this is the best choise but it brings up hosting question. > >>Sharon. > > With best wishes. > Andriy. > The benefit of free hosting is quite obvious. Minimal maintanance, proper backups, download mirrors, minimal downtimes, stable and reliable bandwidth, free of charge, and everything works out of the box. Though we can have our own hosting, if possible, using a free one is better. Regarding to bug trackers, bugzilla is quite complete, but its UI is really too bad for ordinary end users. It's a pity that Google is not available in some countries. It came to my mind that there are two sourceforge derivatives. http://savannah.nongnu.org/ http://developer.berlios.de/ Both are derived from the very old sourceforge.net code. So they look very similar to the original old sourceforge.net many years ago. They provide everything now we're using from sf.net. Moving away from sf.net not only means we need to get a new bug tracker and git repos, but it also means that we need to recreate all of the user accounts and settings the permissions properly. If possible, migrating old bugs to the new systems. That's quite a lot of work which I'd like to avoid. Can we submit support requests to sf.net staff asking for some help? I did not see any options in the new admin UI to turn off the stupid "new features". I don't like the new UI, either, but I'd like to avoid migrating everything to minimize the effort needed, if possible. |
From: Julien L. <gi...@ub...> - 2013-04-18 17:57:00
|
2013/4/18 Andrej N. Gritsenko <an...@re...>: > Any thoughts on this? Anything other than sourceforge and bugzilla will be fine for me. I'm working on Launchpad for years, and I think it's also a good choice. There is translation support, bug reports, mailing lists ... But it's still not support git natively, you have to host the source code elsewhere (not ideal :-/) Regards, Julien Lavergne |
From: Andrej N. G. <an...@re...> - 2013-04-18 18:10:12
|
Hello! PCMan has written on Friday, 19 April, at 1:25: >The benefit of free hosting is quite obvious. >Minimal maintanance, proper backups, download mirrors, minimal >downtimes, stable and reliable bandwidth, free of charge, and >everything works out of the box. >Though we can have our own hosting, if possible, using a free one is better. Completely agree. >Regarding to bug trackers, bugzilla is quite complete, but its UI is >really too bad for ordinary end users. It's a pity that Google is not >available in some countries. >It came to my mind that there are two sourceforge derivatives. >http://savannah.nongnu.org/ >http://developer.berlios.de/ >Both are derived from the very old sourceforge.net code. >So they look very similar to the original old sourceforge.net many years ago. >They provide everything now we're using from sf.net. They both look pretty good, BTW. BerliOS even have two GIT browsers, each have own nice sides and both are much better than Allura. >Moving away from sf.net not only means we need to get a new bug >tracker and git repos, but it also means that we need to recreate all >of the user accounts and settings the permissions properly. If >possible, migrating old bugs to the new systems. >That's quite a lot of work which I'd like to avoid. That was exact argument why I was against any moves last summer. Well, migration of GIT and users permissions are simple enough. But migration of tracker is not. >Can we submit support requests to sf.net staff asking for some help? >I did not see any options in the new admin UI to turn off the stupid >"new features". >I don't like the new UI, either, but I'd like to avoid migrating >everything to minimize the effort needed, if possible. I've asked to prevent upgrade at their advertisement page already. I'll ask them again by other means as well. At least they keep hsqldb from upgrade for now (some of developers said that in comment) so I hope they can do it for us as well. But I'm not sure how long that status quo will last anyway. They treat SF as their toy but it's a tool for us. Why they don't want to understand that? Andriy. |
From: PCMan <pcm...@gm...> - 2013-04-21 15:48:46
|
I keep searching for better free project hosting this weekend and found this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open_source_software_hosting_facilities Wikipedia contains a page dedicated to comparison of free project hosting. >From the tables, I found some better ones more suitable for our needs. 1. Berlios: Highly resembles old sourceforge.net, but its future seems to be more uncertain and has shortage of manpower. It was planned to be shut down in 2011. http://developer.berlios.de/forum/forum.php?forum_id=37450 Then, because of rescue for others, it continues. http://developer.berlios.de/forum/forum.php?forum_id=37533 Though it still works now in 2013, these events raises some questions about how long it will keep working. 2. GNU Savannah: This one is far less polished and less well known, but I guess it will be continued as long as GNU exists? 3. CodePlex (by Microsoft): Yes, read carefully, it's powered by Microsoft. Except for the political problems (it's a Microsoft product and closed source), technically it's a good project hosting website. It provides most of the features we need, including a nice issue tracker. Well, hosting a Linux/*nix project on Codeplex makes me feel that Microsoft is supporting Linux and free software development and that feeling is good. :-) 4. Google code (blobked in Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Sudan, Syria) Because it's not availble in some countries, I considered this a poorer option. To my suprise, sourceforge.net is also blocked in these countries as well. So, by moving to Google code we do not loss any users since sf.net is not available to them, either. However, if we're going to move to other project hosting, I prefer one that's freely available for developers/users from all countries. So this is a bad option. Please, comments and discussions are wanted. Or, are there developers who do not want to move and want to stay with the new sf.net user interface? Thank you. On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 2:10 AM, Andrej N. Gritsenko <an...@re...> wrote: > Hello! > > PCMan has written on Friday, 19 April, at 1:25: >>The benefit of free hosting is quite obvious. >>Minimal maintanance, proper backups, download mirrors, minimal >>downtimes, stable and reliable bandwidth, free of charge, and >>everything works out of the box. >>Though we can have our own hosting, if possible, using a free one is better. > > Completely agree. > >>Regarding to bug trackers, bugzilla is quite complete, but its UI is >>really too bad for ordinary end users. It's a pity that Google is not >>available in some countries. > >>It came to my mind that there are two sourceforge derivatives. >>http://savannah.nongnu.org/ >>http://developer.berlios.de/ > >>Both are derived from the very old sourceforge.net code. >>So they look very similar to the original old sourceforge.net many years ago. >>They provide everything now we're using from sf.net. > > They both look pretty good, BTW. BerliOS even have two GIT browsers, > each have own nice sides and both are much better than Allura. > >>Moving away from sf.net not only means we need to get a new bug >>tracker and git repos, but it also means that we need to recreate all >>of the user accounts and settings the permissions properly. If >>possible, migrating old bugs to the new systems. >>That's quite a lot of work which I'd like to avoid. > > That was exact argument why I was against any moves last summer. > Well, migration of GIT and users permissions are simple enough. But > migration of tracker is not. > >>Can we submit support requests to sf.net staff asking for some help? >>I did not see any options in the new admin UI to turn off the stupid >>"new features". >>I don't like the new UI, either, but I'd like to avoid migrating >>everything to minimize the effort needed, if possible. > > I've asked to prevent upgrade at their advertisement page already. > I'll ask them again by other means as well. At least they keep hsqldb > from upgrade for now (some of developers said that in comment) so I hope > they can do it for us as well. But I'm not sure how long that status quo > will last anyway. They treat SF as their toy but it's a tool for us. Why > they don't want to understand that? > > Andriy. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Precog is a next-generation analytics platform capable of advanced > analytics on semi-structured data. The platform includes APIs for building > apps and a phenomenal toolset for data science. Developers can use > our toolset for easy data analysis & visualization. Get a free account! > http://www2.precog.com/precogplatform/slashdotnewsletter > _______________________________________________ > Pcmanfm-develop mailing list > Pcm...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pcmanfm-develop |
From: PCMan <pcm...@gm...> - 2013-04-21 15:54:52
|
On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 11:48 PM, PCMan <pcm...@gm...> wrote: > I keep searching for better free project hosting this weekend and found this. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open_source_software_hosting_facilities > > Wikipedia contains a page dedicated to comparison of free project hosting. > From the tables, I found some better ones more suitable for our needs. > > 1. Berlios: > Highly resembles old sourceforge.net, but its future seems to be more > uncertain and has shortage of manpower. > It was planned to be shut down in 2011. > http://developer.berlios.de/forum/forum.php?forum_id=37450 > Then, because of rescue for others, it continues. > http://developer.berlios.de/forum/forum.php?forum_id=37533 > Though it still works now in 2013, these events raises some questions > about how long it will keep working. > > 2. GNU Savannah: > This one is far less polished and less well known, but I guess it will > be continued as long as GNU exists? > > 3. CodePlex (by Microsoft): > Yes, read carefully, it's powered by Microsoft. > Except for the political problems (it's a Microsoft product and closed > source), technically it's a good project hosting website. It provides > most of the features we need, including a nice issue tracker. > Well, hosting a Linux/*nix project on Codeplex makes me feel that > Microsoft is supporting Linux and free software development and that > feeling is good. :-) Forgot to say, CodePlex supports git. Well done, Microsoft! > 4. Google code (blobked in Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Sudan, Syria) > Because it's not availble in some countries, I considered this a > poorer option. To my suprise, sourceforge.net is also blocked in these > countries as well. So, by moving to Google code we do not loss any > users since sf.net is not available to them, either. > However, if we're going to move to other project hosting, I prefer one > that's freely available for developers/users from all countries. So > this is a bad option. 5. Launchpad: This one is good as well. The only problem is it forces the use of bazaar version control system, but we're using git. Personally, I see no reason to learn a new tool just because we need a new project hosting website. Unless there is an easy way to integrate git, personally I'm against this option. However, if other developers/translators prefer launchpad, I'm still OK with learning a new tool. > Please, comments and discussions are wanted. > Or, are there developers who do not want to move and want to stay with > the new sf.net user interface? > Thank you. |
From: Andrej N. G. <an...@re...> - 2013-04-21 16:54:31
|
Hello! PCMan has written on Sunday, 21 April, at 23:48: >I keep searching for better free project hosting this weekend and found this. >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open_source_software_hosting_facilities >Wikipedia contains a page dedicated to comparison of free project hosting. >>From the tables, I found some better ones more suitable for our needs. >1. Berlios: >Highly resembles old sourceforge.net, but its future seems to be more >uncertain and has shortage of manpower. >It was planned to be shut down in 2011. >http://developer.berlios.de/forum/forum.php?forum_id=37450 >Then, because of rescue for others, it continues. >http://developer.berlios.de/forum/forum.php?forum_id=37533 >Though it still works now in 2013, these events raises some questions >about how long it will keep working. That is a bit sad. >2. GNU Savannah: >This one is far less polished and less well known, but I guess it will >be continued as long as GNU exists? I think the same. It's probably the best choice. It uses CGit as GIT browser though and CGit misses 'diff to current' mode that is present in GitWeb. I used that mode number of times so I like GitWeb more. :) >3. CodePlex (by Microsoft): >Yes, read carefully, it's powered by Microsoft. >Except for the political problems (it's a Microsoft product and closed >source), technically it's a good project hosting website. It provides >most of the features we need, including a nice issue tracker. >Well, hosting a Linux/*nix project on Codeplex makes me feel that >Microsoft is supporting Linux and free software development and that >feeling is good. :-) I don't trust Microsoft even a bit. I'm sorry. :) >4. Google code (blobked in Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Sudan, Syria) >Because it's not availble in some countries, I considered this a >poorer option. To my suprise, sourceforge.net is also blocked in these >countries as well. So, by moving to Google code we do not loss any >users since sf.net is not available to them, either. >However, if we're going to move to other project hosting, I prefer one >that's freely available for developers/users from all countries. So >this is a bad option. And with their latest behavior I cannot trust Google much as well. :) >Please, comments and discussions are wanted. >Or, are there developers who do not want to move and want to stay with >the new sf.net user interface? At least SF.net suspended migration of LXDE/PCManFM for now and they told me they want to fix every regression. I've reported few of them in their tracker already. So no rush required for now, we'll be still on the former interface. As I said earlier, migration of tracker to another hosting will be a huge headache because I'm afraid we'll just lose all the tickets in the process and start new tracker from scratch. It's why I want to stay with SF.net as long as possible, to keep trackers data. But if they never fix new interface then we'll have no choice but migrate. And we can do kind of smooth migration: leave old tracker with note that we were moved and leave all tickets there until they are closed. Developers will have to work with two trackers though in that case... Andriy. |
From: Andrej N. G. <an...@re...> - 2013-04-21 17:41:58
|
Hello! Daniele Forsi has written on Sunday, 21 April, at 19:19: >2013/4/21 Andrej N. Gritsenko: >>>2. GNU Savannah: >>>This one is far less polished and less well known, but I guess it will >>>be continued as long as GNU exists? >> >> I think the same. It's probably the best choice. It uses CGit as GIT >> browser though and CGit misses 'diff to current' mode that is present in >> GitWeb. I used that mode number of times so I like GitWeb more. :) >savannah has both cgit and gitweb and also direct browsing of the directories >http://git.savannah.gnu.org/ Oh, that is perfect! I just tried to follow 'Browse' links in some of existing projects so seeing no offer to choose I thought there is no much choices. I'm glad to know I was wrong. Thank you very much! Andriy. |