Too bad github seems to be out (could we get more space for a small monthly fee, assuming Wesnoth can afford it?), it's really a pleasure to use. Never like SourceForge too much, it's rather slow and unwieldly - well, it would still be a big improvement over gna! .
Both github and google code have https:// write access (actually that's all google code offers), which is a big deal for me (and perhaps others) as it'd allow me to work behind a proxy. As far as I can tell sourceforge only offers git:// and ssh://. I haven't been active recently so feel free to disregard my vote, but at first glance Google Code looks like the best solution to me. gabba 2013/2/21 jeremy rosen <jeremy.ro...@enst-bretagne.fr> > I have to admit that code review is an awesome tool for patch management. > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 5:21 PM, christopher hopman <cjhop...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > I haven't been real active on Wesnoth, but I thought I'd share my > thoughts, > > feel free to disregard them. > > > > In my experience, GitHub is the best (most user/developer-friendly > project > > hosting), I really wish we could find a way to make it work. I've always > > disliked sourceforge as the site always seemed very user-unfriendly > (though > > I did just take a quick look at their site and it has gotten better, > though > > still not great and the ads are too intrusive). > > > > One option to consider is Google Code which has a 4GB limit. I don't > like it > > as much as GitHub, particularly the UI is basic/ugly. > > > > One major benefit of GitHub or Google Code over sourceforge is integrated > > code review. This is something I would have loved to have when I was more > > active on Wesnoth. > > > > Here's some other's thoughts on project hosting: > > > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3435884/google-code-hosting-vs-sourceforge > > > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4093181/where-to-host-an-open-source-project-codeplex-google-code-sourceforge > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 5:33 AM, Eric S. Raymond <e...@thyrsus.com> > wrote: > >> > >> Gna! does not host git repositories. Supposing it did, one of the > >> motivations for the move is a sense that Gna! is teetering on the > >> brink and not a safe place to remain. We need to pick a new > >> hosting site. > >> > >> GitHub has a lot of fans in Wesnoth's developer base. But it is not > >> going to be GitHub. The reason is size. > >> > >> AI0867 did a test conversion with git-svn to scope the size of the git > >> repo. With aggressive GC and repacking it is 1.4GiB. GitHub has a > >> limit of 1GiB per repo, not because of storage space but because they > >> fear downloaders becoming bandwidth hogs. Mordante asked the GitHub > >> admins for an exception to this policy; he was politely but definitely > >> denied. > >> > >> On IRC I have heard two different kinds of attempt to argue away this > >> denial. One was "but it's just described as a guideline, not a hard > >> quota". This will not wash; we asked the GitHub admins if they are > >> willing to host a 1.4GB repo and they said *no*. Trying to fly in the > >> face of that denial would poison our relationship with the site and > >> quite possibly get us kicked off for TOS violation. This is not a > >> risk that would be in any way prudent to take. > >> > >> The second form of evasion is various schemes to carve the repo into > >> chunks of less than 1GB size, by breaking out some subset of (a) > >> music, (b) the website branch, (c) the resource branch. > >> > >> This won't fly either. I could run exact numbers, but I don't need > >> to. We are *not* going to trim more than 400MiB off the main repo > >> this way (that's nearly a full third of the historical content!). And > >> even if we could, it wouldn't solve the real problem; what GitHub > >> cares about is the aggregate bandwith of our downloaders, not how it's > >> divvied up into parcels. They would (rightly) interpret a carve-up as > >> a skeevy attempt to end-run their refusal. > >> > >> The clincher is that our release manager wants (quite reasonably) that > >> everything that goes in a release bundle to be in one repo. That > >> precludes breaking out the music - and the other plausible split > >> candidates are small enough to be noise by comparison. > >> > >> So, no GitHub. I don't even have to get into my nervousness about > >> replicating the BitKeeper fiasco by relying on proprietary closed > >> source, or my near-certainty that trying to carve up the repo into > >> chunks would set us up for troublesome unanticipated synchronization > >> problems down the road. > >> > >> Given our circumstances, I think the obvious best candidate is > >> SourceForge. It doesn't have a size quota, we already own the > >> Wesnoth project there, and we'll be able to write our own > >> bugtracker integration hooks from git using the Allura API. > >> > >> However, I do not want to make that SourceForge decision unilaterally. > >> Senior devs and release manager, please weigh in on this. Please > >> either +1 or state a reasoned objection. > >> -- > >> <a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/";>Eric S. Raymond</a> > >> > >> If gun laws in fact worked, the sponsors of this type of legislation > >> should have no difficulty drawing upon long lists of examples of > >> criminal acts reduced by such legislation. That they cannot do so > >> after a century and a half of trying -- that they must sweep under the > >> rug the southern attempts at gun control in the 1870-1910 period, the > >> northeastern attempts in the 1920-1939 period, the attempts at both > >> Federal and State levels in 1965-1976 -- establishes the repeated, > >> complete and inevitable failure of gun laws to control serious crime. > >> -- Senator Orrin Hatch, in a 1982 Senate Report > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Wesnoth-dev mailing list > >> Wesnoth-dev@gna.org > >> https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wesnoth-dev mailing list > > Wesnoth-dev@gna.org > > https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wesnoth-dev mailing list > Wesnoth-dev@gna.org > https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev >
_______________________________________________ Wesnoth-dev mailing list Wesnoth-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
