Hi Johan, On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 09:29:14AM +1100, Johan Bergström wrote: > I'm feeling a bit split up about using gerrit, the mailing list, > mantis and irc. I think the mailing list is a good way of getting a > discussion going, but would prefer using something "closer" to git for > ease of use. Gerrit is one way – but another way would be using github > for this.
I agree – I'm not happy about the diversity either. Gerrit is a nice idea, but the implementation sucks (you need to change / amend your current commit rather than having a feature branch). The UI is probably the worst web thing I've ever seen, and I've seen SourceForge. Last but not least, the interaction with Gerrit is a nightmare, even for people who know Git by heart. > For the record; I'm not out to open a discussion about what > site/software is superior, its only my opinion. Well, I kind of am: I want to reduce the choices and I would like to chose the best option of the ones we have ;) I don't want this to turn into a pseudo-religious flame-war, though … > It seems like the github mirror of the official repo – > https://github.com/octo/collectd – is accepting pull requests. FYI, there is a "more official" repository now: https://github.com/collectd/collectd I'd prefer if people would send pull requests for this repository in the future. Currently the repository on git.verplant.org is the canonical repository and changes are pushed to collectd/collectd and octo/collectd hourly. However, I'm using git.verplant.org for feature branches, too, so using the collectd/collectd mirror on GitHub will give you a "cleaner" repository. I'm accepting pull requests and the feature is nice. It's not without problems, but compared to the nightmare that is Gerrit these are really minor: - The repository owner (the one who's supposed to accept the pull request) can't change the target branch himself. I usually get PRs for the "master" branch but want to merge bug fixes into one of the version-tracking branches. - If a change can be merged via Fast Forward, I would prefer *not* having a "merge commit". I.e. I'd like to have git-merge's "--no-ff" option for GitHub's PRs. > I understand the downsides of putting these things onto a commercial > site, but think its a fair tradeoff (should you mirror the git repo > locally) for ease of use and public visibility. Well, GitHub has been "nice" to free software projects so far and I don't see a risk of lock-in. If they change their policy or a better option arises, we can easily Let's see what others think :) Best regards, —octo -- Florian octo Forster Hacker in training GnuPG: 0x0C705A15 http://octo.it/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ collectd mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.verplant.org/listinfo/collectd
