> > When comes to SF versus GITHUB - the main problem from my perspective is that > SF overs a unified (one account) for tracker, forums, downloads, code > repo.....If we move code repo to GITHUB, we will force the developer to use 2 > accounts (on SF for tracker, forum , etc, and one on GITHUB for GIT only).. >
I guess my original suggestion was not clear then :-) I was suggesting to completely move from SF. Just add a pointer to GH. > For manageability reasons I would prefer to have a place hosting everything. > Agreed. > What options I see: > > 1) move everything (tracker + GIT and the rest ?) on GITHUB > What would the rest be? > 2) keep SF as primary GIT repo and GITHUB can be a secondary. Developers can > use the SF accounts for everything and use GITHUB as an interface to the > community (changes, pull requests, etc).. > The problem I see here is that there would be a split so it could potentially be confusing. When a user sends a pull request, and issue is automatically created, so there would be two places for issues :-S Having GitHub not as the primary repo is not so nice because pull requests can't be disabled, so people could think that that is the place to contribute code :-S So, I think the two choices become: - Move everything to GH and have a read-only mirror somewhere (SF, BitBucket, self hosted, ...) - Stick to SF Personally I'd go for GitHub. In case there is anything I can do to help, whatever the choice is, don't hesitate to ask :-) Regards, -- Saúl Ibarra Corretgé AG Projects _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.opensips.org http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devel
