On 2019-09-14 10:13:09 +0200 (+0200), Bastian Blank wrote: > On Sat, Sep 14, 2019 at 10:29:32AM +0530, Balasankar "Balu" C wrote: > > > What exactly do you propose here? The Salsa admins look like > > > not accepting more contributors, neither seem open to > > > suggestions. They just do "their way". I've countless times > > > wrote to both them and in public that I'd love to be involved > > > to make things more free. They also refused to use a packaged > > > version of Gitlab even before it was a thing. They decided to > > > use Google service, without prior communication about it and > > > agreement of the community. When some of us pointed out it > > > wasn't ok, it was strongly rejected, despite any possible > > > offer to use something else (like Swift storage of other > > > providers). > > > > This feels like a serious problem to me. Could you also share > > links, please? > > https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/20180819073423.xlnd4rqzc4elb...@shell.thinkmo.de
And for those not wanting to wade through the entire thread, I went
and talked to some service providers who offer a Gitlab-compatible
object store which is implemented entirely as free software
(OpenStack Swift), and got a genuine offer from one of those service
providers to donate access for the Debian project to use it as a
file back-end for Salsa:
https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2018/08/msg00300.html
Since this offer was simply ignored, I did not pursue the matter any
farther. I'd much rather Debian's community infrastructure not
depend on proprietary services (or open-core software products for
that matter), but I'm not the one running it. Instead I chose to
move on and spend my limited time furthering software freedom in
other venues where it can actually make a difference.
--
Jeremy Stanley
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
