On Dec 31, 2009, at 9:37 AM, Guillaume Smet wrote:
>>> - when we approve a project, we sometimes discuss the license with the
>>> project creator;
>>> - we also sometimes decide to give a dead project to another community member;
>>> - we are sure the code repository won't go to trash because managed by
>>> some random company having problems or making the wrong decision for
>>> us;
>>> - it's a good opportunity to have a lot of PostgreSQL projects
>>> gathered in one place.
>>
>> None of this requires Web sites, email lists, bug tracking, or VCS. Just a central repository of releases. Think
PAUSE/CPAN.
>
> The first 3 items do require it.
They require a site for managing it, but in what sense do they require a VCS, mail list, project site, or bug tracking?
>> There are ways to migrate that content, depending on how hard one wants to work at it.
>
> See the GBorg migration disaster. And we did have the control of each
> end of the migration path...
Yeah, I mean for individual developers. I've moved systems many times, frankly, and it's a PITA, but do-able.
> I disagree with that. The community controls pgFoundry. I find it much
> more future-proof than any other services (at least with the current
> sysadmin team we have).
Then why is there so much discussion of killing it? It's not as future-proof as one might hope.
> If we don't shut it down, we'll have to maintain it (at least for
> security fixes) so I don't see the point of doing so.
Make it READ-only.
>> From the sound of things, quite a bit of time has been invested with not much result. Not saying you won't get
results,just that discussion has given the appearance of large time investments.
>
> We need to move it anyway, even if we only keep it readonly.
Sure.
> We don't force anyone to use pgFoundry AFAIK. People could use github,
> sf.net, launchpad... but they still use pgFoundry, even if it's old
> and only proposes CVS. Perhaps there is a good reason to it? I'm
> pretty sure we're not all masochist.
Yeah. Nothing else is a perfect fit, alas. pgFoundry itself isn't a perfect fit, hence all the bitching. :-)
> Note that if people want to stop the pgFoundry service, it's some time
> I would be able to invest elsewhere. But I really have the impression
> we want to stop it for bad reasons and without considering the service
> it offers to the community as a whole.
I'm ambivalent, personally. I'd like something better, but don't yet have anything better unless I build it myself.
Best,
David