On 25/07/15 08:21, David Rowe wrote: > As Bruce pointed out relying on any single source will mean a repeat of > the same problem down the road. There is nothing magic about github, > and we don't know who will buy them in the future. > > Although this outage has been annoying, its the worst I can remember in > 10 years. Not like it happens every day. > > Perhaps a better solution would be a SVN mirror site, self hosted by one > of us. Or at least a site that extracts and posts daily tar balls, so a > recent snapshot is available for people who just want to use the code.
Probably the one and only thing with using Github is that we'd be using git as the SCM, which is de-centralised unlike Subversion. We're not dependent on a single Subversion repository being online. Mirroring via such an arrangement is a trivial affair. This is useful not just for when SourceForge goes down (which is exceedingly rare, and can happen to Github too) but also when submitting patches, since one can commit as they go locally, then generate a series to be applied to the repository, or working without an Internet connection. If the repository changes in the meantime, they can simply rebase their branch on the new master and re-generate the patchset. Any collisions become immediately apparent. Subversion works well when it's a single closed-team working on a project, it gets more difficult for outsiders to keep track or contribute. Regards, -- Stuart Longland (aka Redhatter, VK4MSL) I haven't lost my mind... ...it's backed up on a tape somewhere. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Freetel-codec2 mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freetel-codec2
