On 02/19/2013 02:36 PM, Saúl Ibarra Corretgé wrote:
When comes to SF versus GITHUB - the main problem from my perspective is that
SF overs a unified (one account) for tracker, forums, downloads, code
repo.....If we move code repo to GITHUB, we will force the developer to use 2
accounts (on SF for tracker, forum , etc, and one on GITHUB for GIT only)..
I guess my original suggestion was not clear then :-) I was suggesting to
completely move from SF. Just add a pointer to GH.
For manageability reasons I would prefer to have a place hosting everything.
Agreed.
What options I see:
1) move everything (tracker + GIT and the rest ?) on GITHUB
What would the rest be?
2) keep SF as primary GIT repo and GITHUB can be a secondary. Developers can
use the SF accounts for everything and use GITHUB as an interface to the
community (changes, pull requests, etc)..
The problem I see here is that there would be a split so it could potentially
be confusing. When a user sends a pull request, and issue is automatically
created, so there would be two places for issues :-S
Having GitHub not as the primary repo is not so nice because pull requests
can't be disabled, so people could think that that is the place to contribute
code :-S
So, I think the two choices become:
- Move everything to GH and have a read-only mirror somewhere (SF, BitBucket,
self hosted, ...)
- Stick to SF
Personally I'd go for GitHub. In case there is anything I can do to help,
whatever the choice is, don't hesitate to ask :-)
Currently, what we use from SF :
- code repository
- file download system
- trackers (bugs, patches, features)
- news system
- donation system
- forums
could all these be replaced kept while moving to GH ? I mean is GH a
platform for complete hosting of projects ?
Regards,
Bogdan
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.opensips.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/users
