My code could get to GitHub anyway, you're right. But I prefer it get there manually, without me officially mirroring it there, and not in an official automatic Gnome-global manner.
It has nothing to do with adding other services too. Even if as a maintainer I'd have Gitorious mirroring support, I'd like it to be on while GitHub mirroring is off. The reason: GitHub is proprietary and centralized. I don't prevent people from cloning and uploading to GitHub: I just don't want it to be done officially, if a maintainer chooses to turn it off. Just a little switch, that's all. A pull request switch is a good idea too (in addition to the mirroring on/off switch), for the practical reasons mentioned by many people here. I agree. On ה', 2013-08-15 at 17:39 +0200, Luis Menina wrote: > Le 15/08/2013 17:21, fr33domlover a écrit : > > On ה', 2013-08-15 at 17:07 +0200, Luis Menina wrote: > >> Le 15/08/2013 16:48, fr33domlover a écrit : > >>> But assume I'm new to Gnome and I want to contribute. It's easier for me > >>> to do it through GitHub than through Gitorious, because of the mirrors. > >> > >> Sure. But if you know GNOME, you also may contribute through bugzilla by > >> sending patches using the GNOME repositories. This has not changed. > >> We're adding freedom of choice here, not removing any. > > > > Of course. But since only *one* service is being supported, specifically > > the proprietary GitHub, I suggest the decision is considered seriously > > before it's made. We're not adding several git hosting services, just a > > specific one, and it's centralized. > > > >> > >>> So you do encourage the use of GitHub, even if you don't intend to. > >> > >> It's indirectly encouraging github over gitorious or gitlab, because one > >> has to come first, and that Github has more users. This doesn't mean > >> that gitlab mirrors nor gitorious are forbidden. GNOME has always been a > >> do-ocracy. The one who does the work has the final word, so I'm pretty > >> sure anyone wanting to help mirror on gitlab or gitorious is welcome. > >> > >> Gitlab and gitorious people who strive to keep using only free software > >> are still able to contribute using a GNOME account, bugzilla and the > >> GNOME repositories. Nothing changes for them. > >> > >> Please keep in mind that here only *more* choices are given to people, > >> not *less*. That's all about sharing. > >> > >>> Maybe GitHub will help more people contribute, but I don't see why it's > >>> so important. I prefer to have 3 developers who care, than to have 5 who > >>> don't care. If I didn't mind to use GitHub, I could as well not mind > >>> using Windows. GitHub is proprietary, just like Windows. > >> > >> Do you dismiss a Linux user that uses Skype ? Would you prefer a Windows > >> user that uses Firefox ? For me they are both free software users, event > >> if not using 100% free software. I personally prefer that people use > >> what they want. They should be able to decide if free software is a good > >> thing for them. Free software is good, but it should be praised for > >> being better than the competition *and* free, not just for being free. > > > > I don't dismiss anyone. I just examine things from the point-of-view of > > a developer who believes in software freedom, and hopes other developers > > here believe in it too. Because of the importance of freedom, not > > because it saves money. > > > > I agree people should decide what they think about free software. That's > > why it's important official GitHub mirroring is not done without giving > > maintainers a unique switch for their module, to control whether it's > > mirrored or not. > > > > Free software doesn't have to be better than the competition: > > Libreoffice lacks some MS Office features, and still many people use it. > > Same for many other projects. Personally, I use free software that > > crashes, instead of a proprietary alternative, just because it's free > > software. Software freedom is important to me, very much. That's why I > > ask one little thing: > > > > If you want to make the GitHub mirroring official for the Gnome > > project's modules, allow maintainers to turn it on/off easily. That's > > all. If people as why some modules turn it off, you can say "GitHub is > > proprietary after all, in contradiction to our goals of spreading > > software freedom" and they'll understand. > > > > Is it a legitimate request to have such a switch for maintainers? > > If you're producing free software, you don't control where it ends. If > you use a licence that forbids some uses (nuclear plants, weapons), then > it's not free software anymore. The same applies here. Your code could > end up on github anyway (or even already is), and you would have no mean > to prevent this, because that's how free software works. So why use so > much stop energy for that? Better work on having mirrors on gitorious > and gitlab too. > > The turning on/off should IMHO be about each maintainer being allowed to > enable/disable pull requests. When disabled, we should make it clear for > contributors on the clones that the maintainer won't care about looking > at the contributions there, and point them out to bugzilla and the GNOME > repositories. _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
