Ooh, I'm against splitting up. I think that with the little amount of change the project has, we should keep everything in one place to keep it more lively.
What I was trying to talk about was making a TODO list. Like: - Create release tags - Add the SF releases to the release tag - Move trac information into a new wiki structure on github etc. Maybe it's best to start a single github issue "the move from SF" and add comments about what needs to be done there? On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 7:13 PM, Anthony Bryan <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 12:09 PM, Neil M <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> On 2015-07-02 11:33, Anthony Bryan wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 11:02 AM, Neil M <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 2015-07-01 23:46, Anthony Bryan wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 6:53 PM, Neil M. <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I don't have a github account. I've generally steered clear of git due >>>>>> to >>>>>> ugly Windows support compared to subversion. But it looks like github >>>>>> has >>>>>> branched out to support subversion now too and that is still how we >>>>>> access >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I'm not sure? I assumed the others were just imported. but maybe? >>>>> perhaps the Windows support is better now too >>>>> >>>>>> it? That sounds fine to me. I've been migrating some of my other >>>>>> things >>>>>> away from sourceforge, in particular the downloads due to the installer >>>>>> tricks they have been pulling. And I can add metalinks that way too. >>>>>> :-) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> yeh, nasty tricks! >>>>> >>>>>> A few other things: >>>>>> >>>>>> 1) Do we have a way to distribute binaries? It looks like github can >>>>>> do >>>>>> this, I guess I just haven't seen it. I don't know if this is one of >>>>>> the >>>>>> pay-for upgrades or we have a quota limit or what. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> yes, gh can do binaries. I'm not sure if TT pays for it, but >>>>> libmetalink has them >>>>> >>>>> https://github.com/metalink-dev/libmetalink/releases >>>>> >>>>>> 2) One of the issues with github is that there is a lot of code just >>>>>> thrown >>>>>> up there without license information. With SF you could set a general >>>>>> license in the project page. I think we are OK with our stuff but need >>>>>> to >>>>>> keep that in mind if merging other projects in and adding new stuff. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> it might be good to explicitly sort out the licensing anyways? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I think we are pretty good on having markings in the code files >>>> themselves >>>> and full licenses in the directories. What we should probably have is a >>>> page describing how new contributions should be handled. For example you >>>> should use a OSI approved license, include that in code headers, etc. We >>>> could make specific license recommendations like LGPL for libraries, GPL >>>> for >>>> software, just as an example, but I don't think we have to. >>> >>> >>> we could have a README.rst which seems to be displayed beyond the code >>> like how libmetalink does it >>> https://github.com/metalink-dev/libmetalink >>> >>> does it make sense to have all the separate directories be different >>> repositories under https://github.com/metalink-dev or keep them the >>> way they are? >> >> >> Yeah I guess while we are moving things around that makes a lot of sense to >> split them up. We can keep issues separate that way too. > > separate issues & downloads/binaries too, altho checking at SF, it > looks like only Metalink checker, command line, & Editor really had > releases. > > I dunno what makes the other directories/smaller projects more > visible/discoverable, all being in one repo or having separate ones? > > or maybe have the major ones & another misc/extra-tools for the other > things that aren't touched much? > > -- > (( Anthony Bryan ... Metalink [ http://www.metalinker.org ] > )) Easier, More Reliable, Self Healing Downloads > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Metalink Discussion" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/metalink-discussion. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Metalink Discussion" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/metalink-discussion. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
