On 2017-08-11 at 00:50 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> One thing that might really sway me here would be if we could support a
> distributed view of the bug-tracker as well, but i don't know of any
> service that does that effectively right now.
Some candidates for consideration are listed
On Tue 2017-08-08 15:27:46 +0200, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
> (i) Should we use git for revision control instead of mercurial?
this was the question i wanted to trigger -- i'm happy we're having the
discussion.
> (ii)(A) Should we continue to use bitbucket (it also supports git so
> not
On 08/11/2017 06:50 AM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> But anyway, this question is also orthogonal to whether we want to use
> hg or git, no?
Yes and no, it simplifies workflow reducing the importance of (i) and
(ii) for external contributors, and the patches aren't living in
long-term mercurial
On 08/10/2017 03:24 PM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> I'm
> not asking this question to push you or other hg-preferring developers
> out of sks, Jason, and would welcome suggestions for how to have a
> bigger tent. sks suffers from a lack of active development, and we need
> more eyes on it if the
