I personally use GitLab over GitHub for various reasons, but for the purpose of this topic they are both interchangeable. Git is a decentralized system, so it doesn't really matter what you host it on, you could even host the project on some potato connected to the internet using a piece of wire.
There are basically two ways to view GitHub: as just a host for your code and as a platform for managing your project. If you only want to use it as a host it's no different from any other Git platform, but you are on your own when it comes to managing issues, patches and so on. If you want to use it to manage your project, then people who want to contribute will need a GitHub account. This is generally not a problem since pretty much everyone has one at this point, but keep in mind that the GitHub web interface does require non-free JavaScript (GitLab does not have this issue, and you can use your GitHub account with GitLab): https://www.gnu.org/software/repo-criteria-evaluation.html Other than that the workflow is pretty smooth and I have no complaints. It has some nice features like turning issue numbers into links, Markdown syntax and so on. Integration with the Racket package management is no issue either. The web interface is aware of Git and works with any hosting service. I personally prefer to have the source code in a sub-directory of the project rather than in the root, and Racket supports this feature as well, like this: https://gitlab.com/HiPhish/MsgPack.rkt https://pkgs.racket-lang.org/package/msgpack As for projects you don't want to publish, last time I checked you needed a paid GitHub account for that. GitLab offers private repositories for free, but it may be limited to a certain number and certain size, I don't know. On Wednesday, May 23, 2018 at 8:51:16 PM UTC+2, Neil Van Dyke wrote: > > I'm thinking of moving all my open source third-party Racket packages to > GitHub, and had some questions, for other third-party developers... > > 1. How do third-party developers of polished Racket packages like using > GitHub? (Example questions... What friction is there still, to rapidly > making a change and a new release that appears in the Racket package > catalog? Do you know whether being on GitHub imposes extra work over > non-GitHub for some things? With GitHub, is there more work to go > through issue reports and pull requests, and process within the Web > site, because it happens to be convenient or in pursuit of metrics, as > opposed to receiving issue reports limited to ones people felt were > important enough to email you about privately? How do you deal with > using GitHub for SCM of non-commercial stuff that you're not ready to > release? Noticed any signs that GitHub might not always be as > warm-fuzzy, or have any unease about implicitly encouraging other people > to use it?) > > 2. Has anyone automated migrating a history of Racket package releases > to Git (or to GitHub, specifically)? (Rather than converting to Git > from a different SCM system, I'd be converting a history of release > packages from pre-PLaneT, PLaneT, and the current package system, and > want to have version tagging/labeling/naming happen. I'm not sure it's > a good idea, since files were shuffled around within packages over the > last 17 years, for various reasons, but I'd like a sense of how much > work it would be. An alternative, which I suspect is what I'll end up > doing if I move at all, is just to put the source from each last release > in Git, and not try to capture the history before that.) > > Background: My Racket open source releases are in minimal maintenance > mode, while I do a career shift, from gov't independent consulting, to > academic/non-profit/industry research/engineering/policy. Also, my > Racket package release workflow is friction-y for the last few years, so > every urgent quick release in response to some issue someone is facing > feels like more work than it should be, and so I haven't tried to > release various unreleased packages that have been sitting around for > years, and I ceased the occasional evening/weeking whipping up of a new > package intended for release. My top priority for my Racket open source > code is to continue to provide support for packages that I've already > released, and my second priority is to be in a position that I could > easily ramp back up releasing polished new stuff at later date. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
