I agree self-hosting an alternative solution is more burden than it would bring benefit. So let's leave it as is for now.
Regards, Geert Op vrijdag 18 november 2022 19:12:46 CET schreef john: > I don't think the silo effect is a big deal. The main impact is on > transferring bugs and we gave that up when Gnome shut down its Bugzilla > instance. Cross-project pull/merge requests make no sense, so I guess your > complaint is that you can't use your Github account to submit a PR to e.g. > Gtk because while there's a Gtk mirror on Github it doesn't take PRs, you > have to get a Gnome LDAP account and make your MR (merge request, gitlab's > name for pull request). > > Based on what I see over at Gnome running a gitlab instance is a lot of > work. Plus even with the Gnome Foundation's compute resources it frequently > bogs down. I don't think we'd want to do that. > > I'd never even heard of gitea or codeberg and I've encountered only one > project on sourcehut. I wasn't terribly impressed. > > We could switch the git mirror to Sourceforge, which would get us the > code-browsing, though not as nice as GitHub's, and the merge requests. I > don't know how the edit/discussion flow works there, but I bet it's not as > nice as Github's either. > > That leaves CI. Sourceforge doesn't provide it, so we'd have to set up our > own instance of something; Jenkins used to be popular but I don't know if > it's still considered the best. Regardless that's more time spent setting > it up, securing, and maintaining it. > > Regards, > John Ralls > > > On Nov 18, 2022, at 9:15 AM, Geert Janssens <geert.gnuc...@kobaltwit.be> > > wrote: > > > > That's a good analysis of the situation. > > > > I agree this is largely a legal issue to be solved by organisations like > > the SFC. > > > > At a deeper level though I agree this could only have happened because OSS > > has allowed github to become such a golden cage for our projects in the > > first place. And this seems to happen over and over again. > > > > It has become very hard to leave github because of the network effect. And > > I agree we can't make others not have a clone of the gnucash repo on > > github. That doesn't mean we can't make a statement by not hosting our > > own forks/clones there ourselves if we care enough. > > > > I don't know if *I* care enough. I am concerned about these developments, > > but at the same time I wouldn't want to add more infrastructure > > maintenance to our already limited time. > > > > SFC suggested a few alternatives, either hosted (sourcehut, codeberg) or > > self-hosted (gitea, gitlab CE, sourcehut). > > > > Codeberg is very similar to github, except for CI (which is currently in > > closed beta). So it offers much of what our users/contributors are > > already used to. I don't know about the others. > > > > As a last semi-OT remark/rant, I think all the alternatives are missing a > > key piece - federation. > > > > You either have a centrally hosted platform(codeberg.org,...), or you have > > completely isolated islands that happen to use the same software (think > > gitlab.gnome.org, gitlab.kitware.com,...) > > _______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
