I’ve found that GitHub encourages git commits as a project journal even though gits originating prject has a very diff / change set oriented workflow. And The latter is a more useful granularity of contribution for complex prjects like ghc.
On Sun, Nov 4, 2018 at 10:27 AM Manuel M T Chakravarty <c...@justtesting.org> wrote: > > Am 30.10.2018 um 10:07 schrieb Simon Marlow <marlo...@gmail.com>: > > > > I'm entirely happy to move, provided (1) whatever we move to provides > the functionality we need, and (2) it's clearly what the community wants > (considering both current and future contributors). In the past when moving > to GitHub was brought up, there were a handful of core contributors who > argued strongly in favour of Phabricator, do we think that's changed? Do we > have any indication of whether the survey respondents who were > anti-Phabricator would be pro- or anti-GitLab? > > FWIW, while I still think GitHub is preferable, GitLab would be an > improvement over Phabricator IMHO. > > Cheers, > Manuel > > _______________________________________________ > ghc-devs mailing list > ghc-devs@haskell.org > http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs >
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list ghc-devs@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-devs
