An excellent thought, but every service adds overhead on the infra team. If there were enough projects demanding it I guess we would find a way of providing it. So how many projects demand it? Do infra feel that that is "enough"?
What if infra provided VMs and PMCs managed the instances themselves (with essential stuff like Git managed by infra - assuming that kind if configuration is possible) Sent from my Windows Phone ________________________________ From: Niclas Hedhman<mailto:nic...@hedhman.org> Sent: 3/4/2015 7:25 PM To: dev@community.apache.org<mailto:dev@community.apache.org> Subject: GitLab? Opening a new thread... Git without Github is like sex without a partner, sufficient but not very satisfactory. Github option has been explored in the past, and due to various reasons, it was not possible to achieve. But, during my last 2-3 year absence, has the GitLab[1] option been discussed and/or tried? GitLab is open sourced, can run on our infra and has many of the essential features of Github. But perhaps people are satisfied enough with the Github mirroring that is already in place, but with GitLab in house, we could (in theory) add features around licensing (like ICLA style assurance, similar to Jira), and non-committers could(!) be allowed a direct route to the horse's mouth... Although the Enterprise system cost money, my guess is that GitLab would be happy to waive fees and give us access to EE. Just a thought. [1] https://about.gitlab.com/features/ -- Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java
