[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-scm-interest
Subject:    Re: [Kde-scm-interest] Alternate Git options
From:       Jeff Mitchell <mitchell () kde ! org>
Date:       2010-05-11 22:49:30
Message-ID: 4BE9DEFA.8090309 () kde ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/signed)]


On 05/11/2010 04:03 PM, Thomas Zander wrote:
> On Tuesday 11. May 2010 21.29.47 Jeff Mitchell wrote:
>> Merge requests:
>> Nothing but GitHub and Gitorious currently handle merge requests per se,
>> but Reviewboard's git handling is getting better.
> 
> pure git based merge requests are essential for KDE growing in my not so humble 
> opinion.

Define "pure git-based merge requests". GitHub and Gitorious don't do
anything you can't do in pure git; Gitorious tells you how to check out
the branch and merge in commits, and GitHub requires little action on
your part but under the hood just cherry-picks patches over for you
(which does some ugly things to history, I might add). So I'm not sure
what you mean by "pure git-based merge requests", as I don't think
either of these would qualify.

> What about github?
> If they can support a git.kde.org a transition to something better (i.e. Free 
> (as in, speech)) can be almost painless.

GitHub has a host-it-yourself-option. I think they call it github:fw or
something, for "firewall", designed for organizations to put behind
their firewall. I know that the licensing is massively expensive
(>$1k/user), more so even than SourceForge/TeamForge, although it may or
may not be shared source (I believe most of their code is Ruby, after all).

Regardless, unless it's open-source and they donate millions of dollars
worth of licenses to us, it's a no-go.

--Jeff


["signature.asc" (application/pgp-signature)]

_______________________________________________
Kde-scm-interest mailing list
Kde-scm-interest@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-scm-interest


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]