On 1/1/2016 4:08 PM, Zachary Ware wrote:
On Fri, Jan 1, 2016 at 2:03 PM, <paul.hermeneu...@gmail.com> wrote:
Is there a summary document that discusses the options examined and why
others did not meet the requirements? I am -NOT- trying to dredge up
arguments about the choice. I am guessing that there have been some.
Easiest would be to look through the archives of the core-workflow
mailing list: https://mail.python.org/pipermail/core-workflow/
In particular:
https://mail.python.org/pipermail/core-workflow/2016-January/000345.html .
If this fact-based decision was based solely on the fact that the BDFL
prefers GitHub, please just say so. It is clear that git is a capable tool.
There were three reasons given in Brett's decision message:
1. No major distinguishing features between GitHub or GitLab
Note that GitHub and GitLab were the only proposals under
consideration; nobody else stepped up to champion any other solution.
2. Familiarity amongst core devs -- and external contributors -- with GitHub
In particular, some inactive contributors who use git and github
apparently emailed Brett to say that they might re-activate if they
could use the process they otherwise use all the time instead of
Python's idiosyncratic workflow.
While the decision might not be my personal first choice, we absolutely
need more core developers contributing, including reviewing contributed
patches.
3. Guido prefers GitHub
Guido repeatedly stated that his preference should not be taken into
account. I believe Brett gave it little weight, but obviously it was
in his mind.
--
Terry Jan Reedy
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
