Hi Andre,

On 7 août 2014, at 19:57, Andre Terra <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 3:46 AM, Aymeric Augustin 
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 7 août 2014, at 02:58, Andre Terra <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > Most importantly, how would Django as a project benefit from this
> > choice other than reducing minimal spam?
> 
> Did you just ask "how would Django as a project benefit from having
> core devs work on committing patches rather than fighting spam"?
> 
> Did you just put on the worst attitude possible because someone asked
> an honest question?

I'm sorry. Please accept my apologies and let me rephrase that without
spam-fighting-induced frustration:

"Other than reducing spam, Django as a project will benefit from this
change be freeing core dev time and energy currently used to delete
spam manually and tweak a feeble anti-spam plugin. Core dev time
and energy are often cited as bottlenecks in the Django development
process."

Other advantages have been put forward; I won't rehash them.

> And, no, I asked what advantages are there for choosing GitHub other
> than the alternatives.

GitHub doesn't require creating a new account, since anyone interested
in contributing to Django should have a GitHub account already to
submit pull requests.

> As someone else aptly put it somewhere else in
> this thread, what if we decide we don't like GitHub anymore?

The same thing will happen as when we decided we didn't like
self-hosted SVN anymore: we'll migrate to the shiny new thing.

> I'm sorry, but ideas don't matter nearly as much as execution here.
> We just need working tools -- nothing fancy.
> 
> I am sorry, I was under the impression that this was a mailing list.
> I wasn't aware we were on a coding sprint.
> I would say execution doesn't matter nearly as much as planning.

When we had the discussions that led to Django's eventual move
from self-hosted SVN to GitHub, we kept planning and not executing
until Adrian bit the bullet and Just Fucking Did It. In hindsight it's
generally accepted as a good idea. That's why I believe that, when
tooling is concerned (as opposed to code), endless planning is
inefficient.

> Many others before and after me have expressed a desire to
> not have GitHub as a hard requirement.

Indeed, but I'm dismissing this argument because GitHub is the
pragmatic choice, whether you like it or not. Also, this reveals
that your argumentation in favor of more planning was actually
aimed at stalling the proposal.

If you hate GitHub enough that you don't want to use it, put your
time where your mouth is and build a solution.

But don't ask me to keep deleting spam manually.

-- 
Aymeric.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Django developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/EFF6241C-C9C0-4689-9B4C-676D1754AF9D%40polytechnique.org.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to