Re: [Pyme-help] Re-activating pyme maintenance

[Martin A. <mar...@go...>]

On Monday 05 May 2014 15:34:55 Bernhard Reiter wrote:
> The manual (*) say we should fork now.
> Does it make sense  to still do this on SF?
 
> I see two advantages of forking on SF.
> a) people will mor easily find the "continuation"
> b) SF uses Allura a Free Software hosting platform, were bitbucket is
> proprietary
> Drawbacks:
> c) effort
> d) advertisment on sf

It should be easy to migrate from BitBucket to SF. TBH I don't mind either 
way: GitHub, BitBucket, SourceForge.

Doing it on GitHub might encourage people to send pull requests and stuff, so 
GitHub might have that going for itself. I don't know if BB vs. SF makes a 
difference in that regard.

I used BitBucket because they gave me an ultimate account for free (being an 
academic) so it's my default choice for most stuff.

> Martin do you intent to at least maintain pyme a bit?

I'm using it, so I'll maintain it to some extend. 

I'd appreciate help/advise from more experienced members of the community 
(most of my coding projects are fairly academic), though. For example, I 
wouldn't actively pursue, say, Debian updating its repositories as I have no 
experience with that. If someone would help with that, I'd appreciate it.

Shall we rename it to PyME2 or something though?

> Then I'll just change the link on wiki.gnupg.org
 
> (*) http://sourceforge.net/p/forge/documentation/Abandoned Projects/

Cheers,
Martin