James,
> I'm happy either way really. I'm quite happy with the status quo but if
> folks wanna move it to Apache infrastructure instead I'm a firm +1 also.
Remember, though, the original question posed by Brian on this thread: is
the status quo (having projects go off the infrastructure for these tools),
acceptable as an ASF policy? Subsequent discussion has been about the
tools, and excusing why people are using non-ASF infrastucture, but not
addressed the policy issue.
As was pointed out on this list once before, and to paraphrase someone from
the last time I recall this topic coming up back in Feb, the problem is that
people start to rely upon the non-ASF infrastructure, and then if something
untowards happens, the virtual infrastructure is compromised. The ASF is
geared for the long term, and to survive the loss of individual members.
So there are two separate issues: which issue tracker, but also whether or
not that should be running on the ASF infrastructure. The latter was the
question raised by Brian.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
