On 13/03/15 05:24, Christian Brabandt wrote:
On Do, 12 Mär 2015, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
> Gary Johnson wrote:
> > On 2015-03-12, zeug wrote:
> > > Am 2015-03-12 18:27, schrieb Bruno Sutic:
> > > >Any thoughts on where will vim source code repo be moved?
> > > >I know I'd be more than delighted if it was hosted on Github.
> > > Bitbucket please. They have Mercurial.
> > > Git sucks.
> > SourceForge has Mercurial, too, and importation tools.
> How about reliability? The Vim website has been down several hours in
> the past weeks.
No SourceForge please. That website is unusable in my opinion. github or
bitbucket would be fine for me although I have a slight preference for...
A lot of people have expressed simply technical reasons for choosing a
successor to Google code. However, more than the technical reasons, the
financial stability and political strategy of the company must not be
forgotten.
I was never happy with the choice of Google code. I am deeply suspicious
of any company that professes support for any non-profit making objective
while itself being purely profit motivated. As Google so predictably
demonstrated, as soon as their financial and political incentive
disappeared from hosting free projects they just mercilessly pulled the
plug. If possible, this kind of situation should be avoided in the future.
Sourceforge
-----------
Sourceforge used to be free (in the "open source" sense") and were
completely
ad driven. However, they are now a closed platform and, more recently, were
bought by Dice Holdings (www.diceholdingsinc.com). This company's profit
motivation has *nothing* to do with software. Dice Holdings provide
recruitment information for job searching websites, several of which
they own.
Dice Holdings bought Sourceforge just as a money-motivated acquisition, and
several new measures they introduced seem to be hurting the trustworthiness
of Sourceforge as a platform. In the future they will probably dump
Sourceforge
as soon as it is not profitable, whether or not it is valuable to
developers.
Github
------
Github started off as completely self-funding. In fact, up until 2012 they
remained completely independent. However, in 2012 they received $100M of
venture capital from Andreessen Horowitz and now have a CEO and full
management team. When they inevitably go public on the stock market then it
is questionable whether they will consider "free repositories" as a viable
business model. However, as it is their main line of business they are a
safer bet than either Google was or Sourceforge is.
BitBucket
---------
BitBucket was created and is owned by Atlassian Pty, Australia. They are a
wholly employee-owned company and raise money through sales and through the
controlled employee sale of shares to venture capitalists. They has
protected their technology and ensured that they remain technology focussed.
For open source projects, this is where they are better than Github, as
their
long-term support for free projects looks more certain. Their revenue is
also
very strong and is not Venture capital dependent, which means that they can
afford to back open source projects. They support both git and Mercurial and
appear to support migration between the two.
--
--
You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist.
Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "vim_dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
