> I think the 1st vote should be on moving from trac to Git**b; besides it > appears that, technically, move to Github is much easier than to Gitlab > (while there are migration tools available for trac->github, I could not > find anything for trac->gitlab). > > On the other hand github->gitlab move is easy (that's where gitlab gets > its business from). >
Thanks for confirming that, this makes it clearer what the *current* options are (simplifying the voting, whether 1/2 or 2/3 or 601/1200 or ...). On a separate note, can someone explain to me why GL is preferable to those who prefer as open of tools as possible to GH? At first I was under the impression that GL was not a business and was largely self-hosted, but it appears it's basically similar to GH or indeed Bitbucket (not that I'm suggesting we do BB!). This question is *purely* technical and not intended to start a different set of arguments, i just feel that for those of us less familiar with GL it is helpful to know why it's preferable to some to GH. (From https://about.gitlab.com/solutions/open-source/ it appears to be "open core" but with some important features only "source-available"; is that the reasoning?) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sage-devel/4b4aab3b-7067-4106-86cf-6b09f3448031n%40googlegroups.com.
