(Sorry for the messed up indent/quote level. Apple Mail is a pain in the butt sometimes.)
> On 19 Jan 2020, at 21:31, Erlend Aasland <erlen...@innova.no> wrote: > > On 19 Jan 2020, at 18:19, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org<mailto:d...@gnu.org>> > wrote: > What is of concern is the whole metadata about issues and their handling > and resolution, the stuff you propose moving to GitHub in the first > place. > > Just for the record; I’m not suggesting GitHub as the one and only > alternative. I think I mentioned some of the GH alternatives in my original > email, IIRC. > > I understand the concern about metadata and such, but a lot of that > information is already present in the commits (both as metadata in the > commits and as commit messages), so I guess you’ve already put uncomfortably > much information in there already… > > The current use of Savannah hosting for that reason is not a whole lot > more than a vote of confidence to GNU/FSF/Stallman (which at the current > point of time are more separate entities than they historically were) > but not of practical importance. > > True. > > Our current ties to Google (via Rietveld) and SourceForge (for > Allura/issue tracking) are practically speaking more tenuous to replace. > Of course they deserve replacing, but doing so by picking GitHub would > definitely be a much more invasive step for the project than just > entertaining a Git mirror. > > True. > > Make no mistake: our current dependencies in that regard are of lukewarm > quality concerning the "Free Software" regard and are a crutch > technically. So a change is definitely called for. > > True. > > But I don’t consider GitHub a nobrainer or I'd likely have an account there: > I chose > not to the last time I read their terms of use, and while I haven't > rechecked since then, its change of ownership does not inspire > confidence. Now of course the terms and guarantees then might have been > chosen in order not to interfere with potential high-powered > acquisitions, a goal many startups work towards to, and may be something > that Microsoft does not need to bother with. So in theory they might > even have improved. I'd need to check again. > > I haven’t delved into this either, but I know that they “support GPL” > (whatever that means). > > But LilyPond is a size where taking out a commercial offer would be pretty > expensive, and > taking out a free offer means you have nothing to rely or insist on > since there hasn't been an exchange of considerations involved. > > True. But, there are GitHub alternatives that are free, for example Gitea. > > > Erlend > > > -- > David Kastrup >
