Your administrative burden is *much* smaller. For example, by simply registering the project, you get a CVS server, a mailing list system, forums, a bug tracking system and all that stuff automatically.
I'm not sure that I understood the point. The infrastructure team does all of those things for new projects, too. We have an excellent CVS process, and are starting a phased migration to Subversion, which is even better and easier.
I agree with you, that the infrastructure team does a good job in establishing these services. The problem is not so far to get these services up and running but to find out
- who does these things - where is it running (links for the docs, etc.) - what is required to access them (passwords and all that kind of things) - much more bureaucracy (I accept the requirement for Apache, in contrast to sf.net, but fact is: There is.)
On sf.net, you are your projects almighty admin. Features are enabled by just clicking on a button and so. This is not that I recommend sf.net. It is simply that I compare what's easier and less work.
Jochen
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
