I am less concerned about losing this kind of meta-info, as I expect we would continue discussion primarily on the mailing list. Mailing lists seem to me to be much better venues for discussion than the facilities provided by github.
My bigger concern is: who would be the project managers? Who would manage pull requests? I would volunteer for some of it, but I could only guarantee responsiveness during winter and summer breaks, and would want to hand off responsibility during my school's semesters. Are others willing to step up? If not, we shouldn't move to a github/pull-requests workflow. David On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 7:13 AM, avih <avih...@yahoo.com> wrote: > I also think github could be good to tinycc. > > The obvious reasons were mentioned: Arguably easier and more open > collaboration, bug reports and tracking, automatic builds and tests, > possibly better exposure to other people, etc. > > There's one thing though which github doesn't make easy as far as I know: > all the discussions, comments, code reviews, tagging (of issues) are not > easy to export as far as I know. The project's wiki pages are in a git repo > which the project owns (separate from the project's code), but as far as I > know all the text which people enter (other than at commits) is available > at most only via some github API. This is a lot of info which would be a > shame to lose if github closes its doors tomorrow. > > While github is definitely used as the main host for some big projects, > and while I maintain some projects on github myself (on my own and with > others), I'd be much more comfortable if I knew all > discussions/comments/etc are being mirrored to an external host under the > project's control, even if only in a read-only format. > > FWIW, I know such export tools exist, but I haven't used them and I don't > know how good they are. > > Overall, I'd vote to move tinycc to github, with the caveat that it'd be > nice to also have an external archive of all the discussions, issues, > reviews, etc. > > > On Sunday, October 16, 2016 1:39 PM, Daniel Glöckner <daniel...@gmx.net> > wrote: > > > Hi, > > on Github we could use Travis to run tests after every commit. > We could also use Qemu there to check if the other architectures still > work. It might also serve as an example how to setup a cross development > environment with TinyCC. > > Best regards. > > Daniel > > > _______________________________________________ > Tinycc-devel mailing list > Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel > > > > _______________________________________________ > Tinycc-devel mailing list > Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel > > -- "Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it." -- Brian Kernighan
_______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
