On Tue, 21 Jul 2015 18:28:26 +0200 Adrien Prost-Boucle <[email protected]> wrote:
> I think the repo itself is not really an issue because the hooks > principles are implemented rather everywhere, and there is always cron > as mentioned ;-), and everyone that cloned ghdl has a local copy so > it's not lost. > > The biggest issue is the wiki, web pages, bug reports, feature > requests, associated comments and discussions... those are usually not > exportable in a standard way out of the SF/github/etc folks. Hence, not > backupable to an independant location that can be used as fallback. > How much serious losing all that would be, actually? Issue tracking, wiki, and blog/notes are integrated into fossil, as is a web front-end. All of that information (and the source code, of course) is stored in a single sqlite database, which has benefits in terms of backup, accessibility, and endurance over time. The mailing list posts aren't currently part of the repository, but I suppose they could be. With bug reports (issue tracking), wiki pages, blogs/notes, and mailing list posts, hyper-linking to versioned information becomes easy in one distributed, easily replicated, easily hosted repository. Just something fun to think about. I don't have a horse in this race, as they say in Kentucky. _______________________________________________ Ghdl-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/ghdl-discuss
