On 07/14/2017 08:22 PM, Thomas De Schampheleire wrote:
However, we need to be careful about disk space too. I guess the
multitude of Kallithea repositories is not such a big problem, but if
users can create other repositories we need to be more careful. I
don't think it is the intention that OOK becomes a public repository
host. Perhaps we can restrict each user to have one repository
'kallithea' and nothing else.
With one kallithea-incoming, this problem does not exist.
Mads, Andrew, what is your view?
Hosting of code from open source contributors requires some continous
amount of work and resources. Both for establishing trust and for
cleaning up when rogue players abuse the system anyway. But it can be
done, assuming we want to do it and establish a realistic process and
tooling.
Also, Kallithea is mainly used internally inside organisations. It has
not been optimized for hosting open source projects with "random"
contributors. I think some of the short-comings are quite obvious - we
don't need dogfooding to find these. A commitment to making dogfooding
work smoothly would force us to change priorities and would postpone
other work. We or someone could do that.
Increased use of https://kallithea-scm.org/repos/ would mainly influence
the areas Andrew currently is taking care of, so I think it mainly is up
to him how we should do it.
/Mads
_______________________________________________
kallithea-general mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sfconservancy.org/mailman/listinfo/kallithea-general
