On behalf of FOSS fans everywhere: please seriously consider using
[Matrix], the Open federated standard system. It's perfect for this
sort of community, with bridges to Slack and IRC and many other systems.
In the last two years Matrix has leapt ahead of other contenders like
XMPP and is bec
Rich Bowen wrote:
> Gitlab is MIT licensed, and the presumption from this thread is that we
> would host it ourselves [...]
Correction: *could* host it ourselves -- if we wanted or needed to. I
explicitly didn't presume that we would.
--
- Julian
---
Jorge Betancourt wrote:
> [...] Like Rich said
> there is a great value on being reachable to outside contributors, [...]
That's illusory. GitLab isn't hard to reach. Should we have suggested 20 years
ago that our infrastructure should be primarily Microsoft tools because they
were familiar to t
Thanks for your comments, Rich.
Re. "owning our data": we do own our source code but what about all the
conversational metadata in GH? In the Subversion project we have a GH mirror of
the code but pull requests and code comments etc. in GH aren't even copied to
the Subversion PMC mailing lists,
Every time I use GitHub I am supporting proprietary software and silo systems.
Every time I use GitLab I am supporting open source software and open systems.
I don't see the ASF's values being upheld by encouraging our projects to use
GitHub. To me it's equivalent to encouraging our members and
Rich Bowen wrote:
> I suspect that you could do this with a combination of:
>
> * mod_rewrite RewriteRule [P] (proxy) rules [...]
> * mod_substitute, or mod_proxy_html rules to munge the content [...]
I did spend some time playing around with that sort of magic and managed to get
some parts of J
In Apache Subversion's .htaccess we have this RedirectMatch rule:
RedirectMatch ^/issue[^A-Za-z0-9]?(\d+)$
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SVN-$1
It redirects a URL like
https://subversion.apache.org/issue/4567
to
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SVN-4567
Why? Human-friendly, tec
Craig Russell wrote:
> For wide-reach public information we already have committ...@apache.org
I'm going to accept this as the Best Answer, combined with Bertrand's "send a
URL", and will reply as such to future shouldn't-be-private mails.
The should-be-public topics that inspired me to write t
sebb wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Dec 2018 at 12:20, Julian Foad wrote:
> > PRIMARY PROPOSAL:
> >
> > 1a. drop the existing four-letter obvious-looking address*
> > - because its name is misleading which (I think) leads people to mis-use
> > it.
>
> The addres
Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> I read the quoted text but don't understand exactly what it is that
> you are suggesting, an example would probably help.
Example -- the one that started this thread:
* somebody wants to ask every project for its best project logo (a public
matter);
* they write "
Julian Foad wrote on 2018-09-14:
> TL;DR: Is [an obvious-looking address] the root of the problem? Need
> [-public and -private variants of said address]?
Can anyone second this proposal or otherwise comment on it?
--
- Julian
[...]
> Another non-private email recently came to priv
TL;DR: Is the "pmcs@" alias the root of the problem? Need "pmcs-private@" and
"pmcs-public@"?
Rich Bowen wrote:
> I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that you've never sent an email
> message to all of the Apache dev lists.
> [It] *always* results in at least one angry response, and usually
(Dropping private@subversion.a.o from CC.)
Daniel Gruno wrote:
> Julian Foad wrote:
> > I don't think this request needs to be private, does it? If not, consider
> > re-sending directly to projects' public (dev@) lists, on the principle that
> > anything that doe
Hi, Daniel. I don't think this request needs to be private, does it? If not,
consider re-sending directly to projects' public (dev@) lists, on the principle
that anything that does not need to be private should be public. In a similar
occurrence a few months ago [1], Rich Bowen said "In retrospe
Ignasi Barrera wrote:
As far as I can tell, all replies I was referring to have been on this list.
Oh! There must be something wrong with my email then. The only reason I
started this thread is because I hadn't seen any.
I apologize. I will solve the problem on my end.
Here are a few examp
t Idespite having thought about it I haven't had yet any
good idea to bring to this list.
Suggestions (and even more patches) are very welcome!
Ack.
Just being aware is the first step.
- Julian
On 28 April 2018 at 15:58, Julian Foad wrote:
In the past 16 days I have seen 11 "Help wi
In the past 16 days I have seen 11 "Help with task: ..." emails arrive on this
list, but no mention of a response.
These are, I suppose, sent by people clicking on our "mailto" links on pages
such as https://helpwanted.apache.org/task.html?24ee9dd8
The first two looked like spam, the later one
Rich Bowen wrote:
> We also track what projects are doing this. At the moment, 42 projects
> are, while 158 are not.
>
> Several people have indicated a willingness to help me reach out to
> those 158 [...]
The Subversion PMC received your request email eight days ago. I then nudged
the PMC sa
About https://reporter.apache.org:
1) What is the policy for suggesting and committing changes to the
source code? Should I discuss here and then go ahead and commit if there
is consensus? Are there separate "live" and "development"/"staging"
versions?
2) Automation. As the current release m
19 matches
Mail list logo
