On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 8:02 AM, daniel g. siegel <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, 2010-10-15 at 16:47 +0200, Johannes Schmid wrote: >> Hi! >> >> > As much as I'd like to claim it, I don't think we can achieve >> > everything with a single shot. :-) Maintainers of GNOME modules hosted >> > outside of git.gnome.org don't always feel comfortable with raw >> > commits to their VCS (security, noise in the vcs history etc). Whether >> > translations should be committed directly to a repo is a big >> > discussion, and I believe maintainers are the ones with the final word >> > on this. >> >> Well, we are currently defining the requirements for modules not hosted >> on git.gnome.org (if we allow them at all). If people are so keen on not >> hosting on git.gnome.org they will probably have to allow automatic >> commits. > > it would be interesting to know _why_ some modules do not like to be > hosted on gnome.org. knowing that would make it so much easier to find > the best way for all of us.
I think this has been well-covered in the past. The typical example is Launchpad, which offers a lot more features in project hosting than we do. Projects get used to using things like blueprints, answers, integrated PPAs, etc. I'm not a fan myself, but I can see how once a project was already hooked on a Launchpad-oriented process, it would be work to migrate to GNOME infrastructure. Sandy _______________________________________________ gnome-i18n mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-i18n
