Re: Moving the Issues DB to Allura

[David Kastrup]

"Trevor Daniels" <address@hidden> writes:

> David, you wrote Tuesday, August 25, 2015 2:57 PM
>>
>> "Trevor Daniels" <address@hidden> writes:
>> 
>>> I'll create a new project - LilyPond - at SourceForge and begin the
>>> migration for real later today.  If Allura at Savannah becomes
>>> available within the next few days it should be easy to transfer.
>> 
>> I strongly urge against that because of SourceForge's track record of
>> "you can check in every time you want, but you can never leave".  Just
>> for the sake of a few days of tracker coverage, we don't want to have an
>> eternal project "LilyPond" at SourceForge laced with malware
>> downloaders.
>
> Well, OK, although there's no intention of placing any executable
> there.

_You_ have not such intention.  Once SourceForge declares LilyPond an
"abandoned project" and puts its own downloads with its own malware
installers there, they are there.

And yes, SourceForge _has_ indulged in such operations.  I think they
declared something like LibreOffice for Windows an abandoned project
which they then treated accordingly.

So we want to keep our engagement there at the level that is strictly
necessary for getting our stuff going.  I don't see that we could have
easily avoided experimenting on SourceForge in order to get our
migration to Allura done timely.  But we should really think carefully
about the necessity of any additional engagement.

> I'll use one of the existing testing projects. The display name is
> readily editable anyway to something like "LilyIssues", although not
> the url.  We can decide what we do next weekend.  My first priority is
> to extract the final data from GC so we have it in Allura form.

Obviously we'll need it, yes.  Hopefully Allura->Allura is less of a
chore than GC->Allura appears to be.

-- 
David Kastrup