Re: pgFoundry Download URLs
От | David E. Wheeler |
---|---|
Тема | Re: pgFoundry Download URLs |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 502262CD-33C8-452C-AD96-17E9F12DDA47@justatheory.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: pgFoundry Download URLs (Guillaume Smet <guillaume.smet@gmail.com>) |
Список | pgsql-www |
On Dec 31, 2009, at 9:37 AM, Guillaume Smet wrote: >>> - when we approve a project, we sometimes discuss the license with the >>> project creator; >>> - we also sometimes decide to give a dead project to another community member; >>> - we are sure the code repository won't go to trash because managed by >>> some random company having problems or making the wrong decision for >>> us; >>> - it's a good opportunity to have a lot of PostgreSQL projects >>> gathered in one place. >> >> None of this requires Web sites, email lists, bug tracking, or VCS. Just a central repository of releases. Think PAUSE/CPAN. > > The first 3 items do require it. They require a site for managing it, but in what sense do they require a VCS, mail list, project site, or bug tracking? >> There are ways to migrate that content, depending on how hard one wants to work at it. > > See the GBorg migration disaster. And we did have the control of each > end of the migration path... Yeah, I mean for individual developers. I've moved systems many times, frankly, and it's a PITA, but do-able. > I disagree with that. The community controls pgFoundry. I find it much > more future-proof than any other services (at least with the current > sysadmin team we have). Then why is there so much discussion of killing it? It's not as future-proof as one might hope. > If we don't shut it down, we'll have to maintain it (at least for > security fixes) so I don't see the point of doing so. Make it READ-only. >> From the sound of things, quite a bit of time has been invested with not much result. Not saying you won't get results,just that discussion has given the appearance of large time investments. > > We need to move it anyway, even if we only keep it readonly. Sure. > We don't force anyone to use pgFoundry AFAIK. People could use github, > sf.net, launchpad... but they still use pgFoundry, even if it's old > and only proposes CVS. Perhaps there is a good reason to it? I'm > pretty sure we're not all masochist. Yeah. Nothing else is a perfect fit, alas. pgFoundry itself isn't a perfect fit, hence all the bitching. :-) > Note that if people want to stop the pgFoundry service, it's some time > I would be able to invest elsewhere. But I really have the impression > we want to stop it for bad reasons and without considering the service > it offers to the community as a whole. I'm ambivalent, personally. I'd like something better, but don't yet have anything better unless I build it myself. Best, David
В списке pgsql-www по дате отправления: