[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Savannah-hackers] submission of Savannah - Next Generation - savann

From: Sylvain Beucler
Subject: Re: [Savannah-hackers] submission of Savannah - Next Generation -
Date: Thu, 13 May 2004 09:42:09 +0200


Hugo Gayosso wrote:
I agree with Sylvain, and by the way, I haven't received any response
from anybody other than RMS (other than agreeing that there was some
lack of communication problems it provided no more information)
regarding this issue either.

All I know is that Bradley, Paul and Jim gave reasons to Richard that made him conclude we had to move to GForge. Reasons include lack of security and of maintaince. Since then, we proved that those last reasons at last are not founded; unfortunately they did not tell the facts that lead to such conclusions. For now, and from what I understand, the FSF staff will follow RMS' decision, and RMS will maintain his decision unless the FSF staff bring him other pieces of information (chicken and egg).

So far what are your plans for continuing developing Savannah's code?

I do not think we have a lot of work on Savannah's code; our current 'fork' is only a way to version control the little changes we are currently making, eg creation of projects in the configuration.

If there are no replies regarding GForge, do you guys think that we
should propose merging (or adopting) the latest version of 'savane'?

Paul just sent a "status update" with details on GForge. An estimation of 16 weeks is given, which should be enough to consider using Savane.
What do you think is the best way to bring this issue on the table?

I think we should decide this soon before your fork of the Savannah
code becomes too different from 'savane' and then we end up with three similar projects: Savannah, savane and GForge.

Our changes should be made as much externaly as possible, so the main code could be replaced without much difficulties. Among others, we could code yeupou's suggestion (found in the code comments) to stop hardcoding the project creation procedures and use a user-defined list of external modules+procedures.


reply via email to

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