> If a contributor is not willing to subscribe to a mailing list it
> may just be a "meteorite" and not really bound to stay in the long
> run.
Reminder that "meteorites" are also important for the project, as they
are also often users who find a bug / want to fix just one thing and
not developers
+1.
On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 10:38 AM Isabelle wrote:
>
> > If a contributor is not willing to subscribe to a mailing list it
> > may just be a "meteorite" and not really bound to stay in the long
> > run.
>
> Reminder that "meteorites" are also important for the project, as they
> are also often
> Reminder that "meteorites" are also important for the project, as they
> are also often users who find a bug / want to fix just one thing and
> not developers.
In that case the barrier to entry still isn't that high, since everybody
already uses email and subscribing to a mailing list with mailm
This is true, but at the same time, this is 'yet another method to
learn', while nowadays a vast group of users are quite proficient and
used to github and similar. Using something a la github would take
away some entry barrier for most user IMO.
On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 10:47 AM Erazem Kokot wrot
> This is true, but at the same time, this is 'yet another method to
> learn', while nowadays a vast group of users are quite proficient and
> used to github and similar. Using something a la github would take
> away some entry barrier for most user IMO.
Although I understand what you mean, I don'
I agree with you, and I suppose most of this discussion is becoming an
interesting pros and cons weighting of different approaches :) I
definitely think that everything is a question of tradeoffs, and the
point made by 'pro github' participants here is that it is quite
likely that github is de fact
Yes it is interesting conversation indeed. The point made about
non-technical users not able to report bugs is a good one, although I
still think that can be solved by email as well (just a regular form and
the contents could get posted to this mailing list or different one).
If people here ar
Yes, I agree with you. For me it looks like the 'no github' people
have the following main arguments:
- github is company owned -> true, and your point about self-hosted
gitlab may be a very good answer. The other thing is, even if it is a
company, everybody still have their local copies of the co
> Yes it is interesting conversation indeed. The point made about
> non-technical users not able to report bugs is a good one, although I
> still think that can be solved by email as well (just a regular form and
> the contents could get posted to this mailing list or different one).
>
> If people
But still, “meteorite” users would probably have to sign up for
account to post a Gitlab issue. If we’re debating this one, it’s the
friction of signing up for mailing list vs. signing up for Gitlab
account.
I think signing up for mailing list is easier and less frictionless.
Not sure if Gitla
> Not sure if Gitlab allows for anonymous issue submission. They do have
> API though so you could still have a form somewhere that would put it
> inside Gitlab.
They do have something like that, but it requires the user to send an
email to a special address and it's annoying to set up, so like yo
On Fri, 22 May 2020 at 11:13AM +0200, Nicolai Dagestad wrote:
> > If people here are against proprietary Github, why not just use
> > self-hosted Gitlab solution? Personally I prefer Gitlab over GH but both
> > are good.
>
> The probleme with having your own selfhosted of gitlab or gitea instance
> subscribing and posting on a mailing list is way easier
Just a few days ago I had to register at this mailing list to respond
to an older thread. Does anyone how you accomplish that?
I searched a bit if I could get mailman to send me a thread again,
didn't find an option. Figured I can view-sour
> Just a few days ago I had to register at this mailing list to respond
> to an older thread. Does anyone how you accomplish that?
> I searched a bit if I could get mailman to send me a thread again,
> didn't find an option. Figured I can view-source the web-archive to
> find the correct header so
> > Just a few days ago I had to register at this mailing list to respond
> > to an older thread. Does anyone how you accomplish that?
> > I searched a bit if I could get mailman to send me a thread again,
> > didn't find an option. Figured I can view-source the web-archive to
> > find the correct
> This is true, but at the same time, this is 'yet another method to
> learn', while nowadays a vast group of users are quite proficient and
> used to github and similar. Using something a la github would take
> away some entry barrier for most user IMO.
Yes, but github is prorietary, and for me a
> If people here are against proprietary Github, why not just use
> self-hosted Gitlab solution? Personally I prefer Gitlab over GH but both
> are good.
The probleme with having your own selfhosted of gitlab or gitea instance
is that, as far a I know, it would require everybody to create an accou
Hi,
I'm a frequent user of "pass".
I never sent a path, report a bug, or request any functionality.
But I like to read the mailing list, to know about the evolution of
this great software. :-)
I have a github account, but I'll not follow a discussion there.
Probably a mailing list is not the
On Fri, May 22, 2020, at 11:17 AM, Ondřej Synáček wrote:
> But still, “meteorite” users would probably have to sign up for
> account to post a Gitlab issue. If we’re debating this one, it’s the
> friction of signing up for mailing list vs. signing up for Gitlab
> account.
> I think signing up
Just wanted to add my 2 cents into discussion. The beauty of open
source that anyone who has enough resources can create a fork and
maintain it, and send patches to upstream, eventually the repository
which has more contributors will become upstream itself. Those who
want to prove that github will
Perfectly said !
> On 22 May 2020, at 20:11, yanchenko.i...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Just wanted to add my 2 cents into discussion. The beauty of open
> source that anyone who has enough resources can create a fork and
> maintain it, and send patches to upstream, eventually the repository
> which ha
On Fri, May 22, 2020, at 6:11 PM, yanchenko.i...@gmail.com wrote:
> Just wanted to add my 2 cents into discussion. The beauty of open
> source that anyone who has enough resources can create a fork and
> maintain it, and send patches to upstream, eventually the repository
> which has more contr
> Just wanted to add my 2 cents into discussion. The beauty of open
> source that anyone who has enough resources can create a fork and
> maintain it, and send patches to upstream, eventually the repository
> which has more contributors will become upstream itself. Those who
> want to prove that gi
On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 6:29 PM Erazem Kokot wrote:
>
> While what you said is mostly true, forking a project without a good
> reason (e.g. the old one being abandoned) doesn't benefit the old
> project. Also forking a project without the permission of the original
> owner would mean that fork bei
For what it’s worth opensmtpd has this kind of process. You can propose
PR/issues on their github mirror, but PRs never get "merged" per github
naming, they take the commit and publish it on their repo (which is CVS
in openbsd or something like that). Main difference is that (I think)
the maintaine
25 matches
Mail list logo
