The problem with github is that we (ASF) cannot give any guarantees if the main stuff doesn't originate from our own hardware.
Not whether the ticket system doesn't loose all tickets (didn't that happen in the past?) nor whether really only IP clean stuff got committed. You e.g. have no clue if someone else uses your email and name in a commit and pushes it. Everyone else can create a commit with your email and name in GIT, there is no check. And when pulling in changes, a faked one might get piggy packed and introduce a backdoor. I know this might be close to paranoid but it is theoretically possible. The workflow with git hosted @ASF is btw pretty much exactly the same for committers. And a PR integration does exist as well. So I don't see what you miss? LieGrue, strub > On Friday, 14 October 2016, 13:52, Felix Meschberger <fmesc...@adobe.com> > wrote: > > Hi John > > This also ties into Mark’s question earlier on. > > The OpenWhisk part of the proposal is currently being developed in GitHub and > the developers are used to the GitHub flow and features including but not > limited to GitHub Issues. > > We have discussed this topic before proposing the project and we are all > aware > on the caveats. But as we write in the proposal, we intend to work with infra > and other stakeholders to have repositories in GitHub accepted as primary > work > repositories before graduation. > > Hope that helps. > > Regards > Felix > > >> Am 14.10.2016 um 12:50 schrieb John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org>: >> >> Sam, >> >> Can your or someone representing the proposed podling explain why using >> github as master is preferable to the current mirror strategy in use? >> >> John >> >> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 6:29 AM Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net> > wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 1:31 AM, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> > wrote: >>>> On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 3:27 PM, Sam Ruby > <ru...@intertwingly.net> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hello everyone, >>>>> >>>>> Attached to this message is a proposed new project - Apache > OpenWhisk. >>>>> >>>>> The text of the proposal is included below. Additionally, the > proposal >>> is >>>>> in draft form on the Wiki, where we will make any required > changes: >>>>> >>>>> https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/OpenWhiskProposal >>>>> >>>>> We look forward to your feedback and input. >>>> >>>> OpenWhisk has a first-time-unique request on its Git repository > request. >>> I >>>> inserted a comment about OpenWhisk's use of a GitHub repository > [from >>>> Infra's standpoint], and the relation to the Foundation and a > possible >>>> block on graduation. >>> >>> If I could get some help in the form of an infrastructure team review >>> of the following plan, I would appreciate it: >>> >>> >>> > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/5b93ec0517ce7f90c0a467db9fc5e9cd087f1d4d9305c5491198b6c1@%3Cinfrastructure-private.apache.org%3E >>> >>>> Thx, >>>> -g >>> >>> - Sam Ruby >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >>> >>> > > B‹KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKCB•È[œÝXœØÜšX™KK[XZ[ˆÙ[™\˜[][œÝXœØÜšX™P[˜ÝX˜]Ü‹˜\XÚK›Ü™ÃB‘›ÜˆY][Û˜[ÛÛ[X[™ËK[XZ[ˆÙ[™\˜[Z[[˜ÝX˜]Ü‹˜\XÚK›Ü™ÃB > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
