[Savannah-hackers] Re: about savannah-hackers

[Masayuki Hatta]

Hi,

>>>>> In <address@hidden> 
>>>>>   Loic Dachary <address@hidden> wrote:
Loic>  > your modifications for Savannah) not enough?  Anywise SF 2.5 has (at
Loic>  > least a kind of) I18N stuff and even seems to have the theme faculty

Loic>  SF-2.5 has a very limited i18n (no templates for instance). Sure it's
Loic> good to be able to translate menu entries but that's about 5% you need
Loic> to translate the whole web site.

Loic>  > which possibly we can use for Savannah.  I think if you even think
Loic>  > about "a complete rewrite" of Savannah, it would be much easier to
Loic>  > adapt achievements from the SourceForge crew.  I guess they got more

Loic>  Believe me I spent an enormous amount of time trying to do this, back
Loic> to SourceForge-1.0.4. The SF is *not* meant to be upgradable. A complete
Loic> rewrite would be less painful. Of course if you think of re-implementing
Loic> all features SF has, it's out of question. But when you think about it
Loic> SF has few original features. What it brings to us is : "everything 
Loic> automated to the max" and a consistent interface for various things. The
Loic> bug tracking thing for instance should really be GNATS, the forum thing
Loic> should be an existing php forum software, not a re-implementation, the
Loic> skills and job section should be a job board software. All these exists
Loic> and a complete rewrite would mean to re-implement the core features
Loic> (authentication, interface) and bind to other software for other features.

Hmm okay, now I understand the situation.  Seems we'll need to
re-write the Savannah core anyway...are you already working on it?
The idea of using GNATS sounds pretty nice, BTW.

Loic>  > resources(I mean users, developers, money, etc.) than us so why don't
Loic>  > we make use of 'em! ;-) If 2.5 is not stable enough, we should help
Loic>  > them to debug it, don't we?  Or do you want to make the Savannah code
Loic>  > fork from the original?  If so I strongly object to it since in most
Loic>  > cases forking is just a waste of man power (Eg. Emacs/XEmacs whirl).

Loic>  I went as far as to actually go to see them (I'm in France) and try
Loic> to convince them that we should all develop that cooperatively. They have
Loic> no interest into this because it slows down things as far as they are
Loic> concerned. I spent entire weeks trying to avoid the fork and was *very*
Loic> sad when I had to give up the idea to work with the SF team. Check 
Loic> http://slashdot.org/articles/00/05/09/0853201.shtml for more background
Loic> on this.

That's too bad.  

Best regards,

--
Masayuki Hatta
University of Tokyo
address@hidden
address@hidden / address@hidden / address@hidden