I'm thinking of moving all my open source third-party Racket packages to GitHub, and had some questions, for other third-party developers...

1. How do third-party developers of polished Racket packages like using GitHub?  (Example questions... What friction is there still, to rapidly making a change and a new release that appears in the Racket package catalog?  Do you know whether being on GitHub imposes extra work over non-GitHub for some things?  With GitHub, is there more work to go through issue reports and pull requests, and process within the Web site, because it happens to be convenient or in pursuit of metrics, as opposed to receiving issue reports limited to ones people felt were important enough to email you about privately?  How do you deal with using GitHub for SCM of non-commercial stuff that you're not ready to release?  Noticed any signs that GitHub might not always be as warm-fuzzy, or have any unease about implicitly encouraging other people to use it?)


2. Has anyone automated migrating a history of Racket package releases to Git (or to GitHub, specifically)?  (Rather than converting to Git from a different SCM system, I'd be converting a history of release packages from pre-PLaneT, PLaneT, and the current package system, and want to have version tagging/labeling/naming happen.  I'm not sure it's a good idea, since files were shuffled around within packages over the last 17 years, for various reasons, but I'd like a sense of how much work it would be.  An alternative, which I suspect is what I'll end up doing if I move at all, is just to put the source from each last release in Git, and not try to capture the history before that.)

Background: My Racket open source releases are in minimal maintenance mode, while I do a career shift, from gov't independent consulting, to academic/non-profit/industry research/engineering/policy.  Also, my Racket package release workflow is friction-y for the last few years, so every urgent quick release in response to some issue someone is facing feels like more work than it should be, and so I haven't tried to release various unreleased packages that have been sitting around for years, and I ceased the occasional evening/weeking whipping up of a new package intended for release.  My top priority for my Racket open source code is to continue to provide support for packages that I've already released, and my second priority is to be in a position that I could easily ramp back up releasing polished new stuff at later date.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket 
Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to