Re: [Squeak-VMdev] SourceForge or SqueakForge?

[Ian P. <ian...@in...>]

> From: "tim Rowledge" <ti...@su...>
> Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 12:53 AM
> Subject: [Squeak-VMdev] SourceForge or SqueakForge?
>
>> A while ago Cees did the initial setup to allow us the option of 
>> moving
>> our source code archive away from SourceForge now that they seem to
>> regard Squeak as some sort of unwlecome visitor. We should probably 
>> come
>> to some conclusion about whether the move should happen.

I've stopped committing anything to CVS on SF since two months ago, 
when Cees et al pointed out the ridiculous position of the SF people on 
our "license [non-] problems" and suggested we drop them.

>> I'd imagine that the chief advantage would be more personal service;
>> Cees is 'one of us' and supports Squeak in many ways. The main
>> disadvantage is probably that Cees has other things to do and 
>> presumably
>> smaller resources than SF. (Does anyone know?)

A CVS repository takes almost no time to set up, and then runs itself.  
(The only "setup" required is related to creating cvs accounts for 
those people who should have check-in privileges, and currently that 
would seem to concern no more than four people on the planet.)

(All Cees has to do is press the Big Red Button on the front panel 
whenever the server crashes. ;)

>> What would we like from a CVS archive?

Err... "man cvs"?  ;) ;) ;)

>> Can we obtain it better by dropping SF?

Well...

On 04 Mar 2004, at 01:07, Andreas Raab wrote:
> There are exactly two features at SF that I like: It's the ability to 
> browse through a CVS repository via the web

I've set up cvsweb on two systems in the past.  (Andreas has even used 
one of them.)  Modulo a couple of insignificant caveats, it's *trivial* 
(one cgi script to install, 1 line to modify to tell it where to look 
for cvsroot, and max 2 or 3 lines to modify in the httpd.conf file to 
give the script the permissions it needs).  After that it "just works". 
  As above, no "Cees intervention" required, ever.

FWIW, SF uses cvsweb to front their browsable repository.  If we made 
our own, you wouldn't be able to tell them apart.

> and the file releases which allows people to get this stuff from 
> "around the corner".

One web page (fronting the CVS web and the "release archives"), and 
some kind of restricted "Squeak release engineering" account on the 
server machine (or other, given NFS/whatever) to manage those archives, 
are all that's really required.

> Other than that the only thing I care about is uptime and Cees has 
> been pretty good on that in general.

Seconded.  I've no complaints at all in that respect.

Cheers,
Ian