GitHub

[Jeff Mitchell]

Ian Monroe wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 2:41 AM, Mark Kretschmann <kretschmann at kde.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 7:04 AM, Dan Meltzer
>> <parallelgrapefruit at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> The downside to any of these options is that we still need to merge
>>> back to svn at some point.  As many know, this usually ends up being
>>> more work than it's worth.  Until kde supports git officially svn is
>>> going to be the point of contact for new contributters and should
>>> remain so to prevent a duplication of accounts and a horrid mess when
>>> it comes to translations.
>> But that is also one problem with the current solution (Jeff's server):
>>
>> It's kinda a private thing and not transparent to interested users. It
>> doesn't invite people to follow our development, or maybe even to
>> contribute. So it's not very FOSS style.
>>
>> Plus, the instructions for participating seemed pretty complicated to
>> me (so far I shied away from it, for that reason and others).
>>
> 
> The other day I couldn't even try out Nikolaj's code since he had it
> on Jeff's server, or at least no one knew how I could. Thats pretty
> ridiculous.

git clone http://git.jefferai.com/amarok.git

That's ridiculous?  It's the same exact thing you would do to get a git
repo from anywhere else, GitHub included.  There's nothing ridiculous
about it.

> I haven't used github much, but I do know that if you want to have a
> truly collaborative project on it you need to either pay or register
> as an open source project which takes human approvial (or this is how
> it was last time looked). I wonder if the problem's Jeff described are
> due to this.

No, the problems I described are due to the architecture of GitHub and
their promoted usage model.  You don't need to do anything special on
GitHub to have a "truly collaborative" project.

--Jeff