A Divendres, 3 de juliol de 2009, vàreu escriure: > Albert Astals Cid wrote: > >> However, hosting Gitorious within KDE has some drawbacks. The most > >> egregious is that it places burden on our system administrators, mainly > >> by requiring constant merging of the Gitorious code to keep up-to-date. > > > > You mean git pull --rebase is time consuming? > > Plus any sql updates, template updates, etc. Updating webapps is never > as simple as updating the source code. > > >> A3) Developers use the same accounts when comitting code to KDE and > >> other (non-Qt) projects. This helps build community because it helps > >> build cross-references between KDE and other projects, and show > >> collaboration that is taking place. > > > > There is really any significant project we could contribute to on > > gitorious besides Qt? Having a look at active projects summary on > > gitorious seems not > > "Significant" is in the eye of the beholder. That being said, Gitorious > is small. Many people just put up their own Git instance (like Gnome, > for instance) or use the non-free-but-oh-so-trendy GitHub (Ruby on Rails). > > Qt and KDE both being on Gitorious.org could certainly help it on its > way towards critical mass. > > >> A5) KDE and Gitorious (and Qt) benefit from cross-marketing and > >> promotion. We'd be the most visible project on the site (most likely > >> above Qt in terms of activity), and our involvement would help make > >> Gitorious more visible and legitimate. > > > > That's not an advantage for us it's an advantage for gitorious. > > How is being seen as the most active and visible project on the hosting > site not an advantage for us? > > >> A6) It makes KDE development look more community-related and less of a > >> walled garden. > > > > See my comment to A3, as there's not much big projects in gitorious other > > than Qt and KDE it would just be a different walled garden. > > See my comment to your comment. > > Also, please explain how Gitorious is a walled garden at all. > > Third, what is the advantage of hosting a Gitorious instance on our own, > in terms of your comments? Then there would definitely be no other > projects to collaborate with, and it would definitely be a walled garden. > > >> D2) "There is not much other reason than that we have the hardware and > >> the hosting, so we can do it." > >> > >> This is provided for completeness, but there isn't much discussion > >> necessary. > > > > I agree with dirk, it's our code, let's be ourself that hosts it. > > Please give some actual reasons why this is beneficial for us. I > included that comment from Dirk for completeness, but it's a totally > silly comment. I can drive my car off a cliff, so I might as well do > it, right?
That'd save us that discussion on git ;-) j/k Citing someone from IRC "KDE code is the highest thing we do as a community. Putting it in hands of someone else is like sending our baby child to a boarding school, some people do it but i do not like it" Albert _______________________________________________ Kde-scm-interest mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-scm-interest
