Part of the reason it didn't work out great for iodoom was server
maintenance. Also, you've confused the Gitorious software (which allows
you to have your own deployment) with Gitorious as a service (which is
what uZu mentioned.) Gitorious's service actually isn't too bad, but it
does lack quite a few of the features Github now has. Two years ago they
were extremely comparable. Now, Github has many features Gitorious does
not. The fact is though, most people have a github.com account but very
few (in comparison) have a gitorious.org account. Because Git is
decentralized, there's nothing stopping anyone from putting their fork
on gitorious.org (or their own server with git-daemon/ssh for that
matter.) It only /really/ matters where people submit things upstream
(and many people like github.com for that.)
On 01/10/2013 01:31 AM, chris deboy wrote:
Yeah, because gitorious really worked out for iodoom :P
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 2:24 AM, uZu <u...@qlone.org
<mailto:u...@qlone.org>> wrote:
Hi there,
I also think that moving to git is a good step but Mercurial would
have
been as good, both are decentralized and powerful SCM, which is what
really matters ^^
Gitorious as a service (https://gitorious.org/) 'just works'
nicely and
would have been a good alternative to GitHub IMHO
my almost 2ยข
On 08/01/2013 23:07, Daniel Gibson wrote:
> I think github is a very good choice.
> It works (in contrast to gitorious) and is really fun to use.
>
> I think the usual objections against cloud-based services don't
apply here:
> * they can't steal source/intellectual property because it's
open source
> anyway.
> * a vendor-lock-in or something like that isn't really an issue
either:
> everyone who clones the repo has the whole history etc, so even if
> github suddenly wants money or goes out of business it's easy to
set up
> something like gitorious again with a clone of the git repo.
>
> This would probably make sense for iodoom3 as well, even though
I'm not
> sure it would help very much.. the interest in the doom3 GPL
code seems
> to be quite low (same for d3 bfg) and with dhewm3 there already is a
> working port.. so no one will want to start again from the
beginning,
> even though some people seem to be unhappy with dhewm3..
>
> Cheers,
> - Daniel
>
> Am 08.01.2013 04:50, schrieb eviljoel:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Eh, finally replying to e-mails. Was an online hermit for the last
>> few days.
>>
>> I totally agree with moving to git and have no objection with
GitHub.
>> But the one part of the question you didn't answer is that Zakk had
>> some reason for moving Doom3 from GitHub in the first place.
Maybe he
>> didn't like a big corporation controlling his repositories or
>> something like that??? I guess what I want to know is what his
>> problem was with GitHub and what made him change his mind.
>>
>> And I guess you are right, I am mostly curious about this
because of
>> ioDoom3. I don't want to put in a lot of time improving the
server if
>> we are just going to move to GitHub soon anyway. I guess I'll ask
>> Zakk about that one-on-one. (Plus this is the wrong list for
that.)
>>
>> Thanks for your input Ryan.
>>
>> Laters,
>> eviljoel
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 11:01 PM, Ryan C.
Gordon<iccu...@icculus.org <mailto:iccu...@icculus.org>>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> There was also the whole Mercurial debate not too long ago.
>>>
>>>
>>> The consensus was that I liked Mercurial, and everyone else liked
>>> git. :)
>>>
>>> Moving off svn is a no-brainer in 2013...it's old and busted.
Git is
>>> fine,
>>> and my experience is that most people don't want just a git
repo, they
>>> specifically want GitHub (and those that don't want
GitHub...hey, you
>>> still
>>> get a standard git repo from it!).
>>>
>>> Also: this is where id software has their canonical repos for
their open
>>> source releases, now, too.
>>>
>>> Also: as I'm sure you've discovered recently, keeping Gitorious
>>> running is a
>>> big pain in the ass. :) I don't know what zakk wants to do with
>>> iodoom3,
>>> but if we're going to make a switch for ioquake3, we might as
well go
>>> to a
>>> nice infrastructure that someone else keeps up and running for us.
>>>
>>> --ryan.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ioquake3 mailing list
>>> ioquake3@lists.ioquake.org <mailto:ioquake3@lists.ioquake.org>
>>> http://lists.ioquake.org/listinfo.cgi/ioquake3-ioquake.org
>>> By sending this message I agree to love ioquake3 and libsdl.
>> _______________________________________________
>> ioquake3 mailing list
>> ioquake3@lists.ioquake.org <mailto:ioquake3@lists.ioquake.org>
>> http://lists.ioquake.org/listinfo.cgi/ioquake3-ioquake.org
>> By sending this message I agree to love ioquake3 and libsdl.
>
> _______________________________________________
> ioquake3 mailing list
> ioquake3@lists.ioquake.org <mailto:ioquake3@lists.ioquake.org>
> http://lists.ioquake.org/listinfo.cgi/ioquake3-ioquake.org
> By sending this message I agree to love ioquake3 and libsdl.
_______________________________________________
ioquake3 mailing list
ioquake3@lists.ioquake.org <mailto:ioquake3@lists.ioquake.org>
http://lists.ioquake.org/listinfo.cgi/ioquake3-ioquake.org
By sending this message I agree to love ioquake3 and libsdl.
_______________________________________________
ioquake3 mailing list
ioquake3@lists.ioquake.org
http://lists.ioquake.org/listinfo.cgi/ioquake3-ioquake.org
By sending this message I agree to love ioquake3 and libsdl.
_______________________________________________
ioquake3 mailing list
ioquake3@lists.ioquake.org
http://lists.ioquake.org/listinfo.cgi/ioquake3-ioquake.org
By sending this message I agree to love ioquake3 and libsdl.
