discuss-gnustep
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Savannah vs. Gitlab


From: Ivan Vučica
Subject: Re: Savannah vs. Gitlab
Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2015 14:39:01 +0000

Fossil not only implies a self-hosted solution, just as Gitlab does, but it also implies switching to a largely unknown tool.

If we are happy with a self-hosted solution, I'll state that the thought of offering hosting (and paying for hosting) GNUstep's infrastructure occurred to me -- however it implies taking over sysadmin responsibilities, including responsibility for users' credentials. Less responsibility for third-party data = "" ivucica.

And I'm also not sure we want to self host. Delegating sysadmin responsibilities is a good thing. But if we do want to run our own infrastructure, I'm happy to offer to set up a nice environment for the contributors (and document what was done along the way). This would be built around Samba4-based authentication database, which conveniently means the possibility of using the same credentials in any tool that can authenticate against LDAP, or even authenticate using Kerberos.

(And if FSF or some other kind and trusted party has spare hardware capacity, that's even better.)

On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 10:43 AM Xavier Brochard <xavier@alternatif.org> wrote:
Le Fri, 4 Dec 2015 09:40:57 +0100,
Alessandro Sangiuliano <a01000010@gmail.com> a écrit :

> I think we should see what is the best choice for GNUstep making it
> to be accessible to users and developers as easy as we can, so:
>
> - Github: fork code with a button; start a new repo with a button;
> easy management of merge request, not so bad in showing diffs;
> interesting plugins; maybe not so nice in bug tracking; it uses git
> that is OPEN SOURCE, you are not forced to use its proprietary
> front-end; it is probably the most used platform to host code; it is
> full of people; what we need absolutely… people!
> - I never heard about Gitlab before, so I can’t talk about it.
> - Savannah: Seems a place where requests take weeks before to be
> completed; it doesn’t have the Github features in managing repos and
> projects; it looks a bit abandoned; to contribute to a project a
> person has to ask for an account and then for  permissions. On github
> a person can fork the code, contribute to it, then does a merge
> request and project managers can accept it or just discard it in an
> easy way.
>

What about Fossil ?
http://fossil-scm.org/
- totally free
- doesn't need a server
- can be easily setup on any hosting service
- everybody can host everything  because all parts are embedded in
  Fossil (code + website, wiki, tickets, docs, etc.)

See this comparison with git
http://fossil-scm.org/index.html/doc/trunk/www/fossil-v-git.wiki

While first steps in Git may be easier (I personally use Git), Fossil is
a very good and fast dvcs.
See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_(software)

Xavier Brochard

_______________________________________________
Discuss-gnustep mailing list
Discuss-gnustep@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]