I agree with you, and I suppose most of this discussion is becoming an interesting pros and cons weighting of different approaches :) I definitely think that everything is a question of tradeoffs, and the point made by 'pro github' participants here is that it is quite likely that github is de facto the dominant platform / way / methodology used in the open source world, with most users familiar to it, and that, therefore, having a github workflow may be the best way to engage a large(r) community. But I agree that it also comes with its downsides, to be weighted against the benefits it could bring.
On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 10:57 AM Erazem Kokot <[email protected]> wrote: > > > This is true, but at the same time, this is 'yet another method to > > learn', while nowadays a vast group of users are quite proficient and > > used to github and similar. Using something a la github would take > > away some entry barrier for most user IMO. > > Although I understand what you mean, I don't think just because new > users want the contributing process to be similar to what they already > know, that projects would have to change their workflow to suit such > users. This is not a great way to learn for the user and pretty > pointless for the project, since if for example using Sourcehut or > Gitlab, users could still use the same argument of comfort with Github > to try and move the project to Github. > > Projects shouldn't be forced to change their workflow to suit a small > minority of the contributors or possible future contributors. > If you were maintaining a project on Github, you wouldn't want users > submitting pull requests over email, so why would it be any better the > other way around.
