On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 4:06 PM, Wolfgang Denk <w...@denx.de> wrote: > [...] certainly not going to do it. Their ToS are not acceptable to me. > > For example: "E2. Prices of all Services, including but not limited > to monthly subscription plan fees to the Service, are subject to > change upon 30 days notice from us. Such notice may be provided at > any time by posting the changes to the GitHub Site (github.com) or > the Service itself." I understand that github may run your project > for free until you put enough effort in it that losing it would be > painful, and then they could decide that the service is no loger > free, but they charge you $$$ for it. All they have to do is "posting > the changes to the GitHub Site (github.com) or the Service itself." > That means chances are good that you don't even notice such change in > time. They have your e-mail addresses - why don't they actively > notify about such changes? > > G11 might be another reason not to use github. Better not use them for > a project which receives any better interest than average.
I must admit that I didn't really consider the ramifications of the terms of service at github -- you make a couple good points there. > In message <aanlktinwdrkfow1wlziw2vc8mu7cqymdmw1qqeln6...@mail.gmail.com> you > wrote: >> The mirror on github would not be a replacement for the custodian >> trees[3] but it can be a useful starting point for staging long >> patches. Forks of github repos are easy to create and can be public >> right away meaning a long patch series can be easy for the custodians >> to pull and easy for testers to pull. > > I want to keep with the requirement that all patches have to go > through a single channel where everybody can take part in the > reviewing preocess even in early phases - i. e. postings on the > mailing list. git-am makes it trivial enough to apply such patches. Yes I totally agree. Please allow me to clarify that I do not want to stop patches being sent to the ML. 'git am' works fine for me also -- once the patches are downloaded from the mailing list. It is the downloading process with which I currently have trouble. I'll focus on streamlining that part of my process so that I can work as the rest of the u-boot developers do. > But, given their current ToS, I will not work with github in any way. Thank you for taking the time to read through their ToS and for considering my request. I appreciate you sharing your interpretation of github's ToS. Best Regards, Ben Gardiner --- Nanometrics Inc. http://www.nanometrics.ca _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
