Re: [tei-council] ODD question

My sense of the discussion is that we have so little faith in SF at this point that if it does come back up again completely, we should take the opportunity to move before another failure happens. But it will help any discussion of whether to move or not if we have a good sense of how much work is involved and what might not be able to be migrated. Cheers, Martin On 2015-07-21 10:24 AM, Lou Burnard wrote:

err I am not sure that we have agreed to do that have we?

Sent from Samsung Mobile

-------- Original message -------- From: Martin Holmes Date: 21/07/2015 17:44 (GMT+00:00) To: tei-council@lists.tei-c.org Subject: Re: [tei-council] ODD question

It sounds like we're moving to GitHub, then. I presume that also means we're moving to git, so we'll have to get a little group of people together to update all the documentation that talks about svn and SourceForge. We should try to get all that done before the next intake of new Council members, otherwise they'll be severely confused.

The first stage is planning. Can we maintain all the ticket history as well as the SVN history? It would be a shame to lose all that stuff.

I have another small SVN project (CodeSharing) that I could migrate in advance as a test case. Would that help?

Cheers, Martin

On 2015-07-21 09:27 AM, Lou Burnard wrote:

...

I certainly agree that attempting to duplicate ticketing, repository, wiki etc etc services for ourselves would be ill advised.

On 21/07/15 16:41, Peter Stadler wrote:

...

Another +1 from me for GitHub. Eventually we’ll have to move on from GitHub someday … but that one-time move is probably less painful than maintaining all those services (repo, ticketing, wiki, …) ourself for several years.

Cheers Peter

...

Am 21.07.2015 um 16:22 schrieb Majewski Stefan :

...

On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 6:54 PM, Martin Holmes wrote:

...

> All of this seems to suggest to me that we really should be > considering > migrating to an install of Allura on tei-c.org. Everything Hugh and > others find worrying about SourceForge's current state will > eventually come > to pass with GitHub too; site like this inevitably rise and fall > over time. > > This is not a valid reason to dismiss GitHub. It's true for everything, including the TEI and its servers. That's indeed true. We should also not underestimate the effort that we would need to put into maintaining allura, gitlab or any of the other platforms. An effort that would be better spent at different areas. So, going with something that is available for free, and having a sensible way to move forward in case of desaster would be great. Given the distributed nature of git, people could continue working/contributing while the servers are down and while the project

Am 21.07.2015 um 15:40 schrieb Raffaele Viglianti: tries to find new hosting options.

...

GitHub is incredibly usable and useful. It makes it simple to discuss tickets in the context of the code (unlike a mailing list), it's well integrated with other useful systems around the web, and some of us already use it daily and have other projects on it. Fair point. Really, I think the ease of use and the tight integration of working with code and ticketing saves much time we cold well use for other things.

...

I frankly don't understand this suspicion of GitHub that seems solely based on its popularity. We can only benefit from moving TEI development there. And, we could benefit from popularity. I don't know if github is really the place where the smart kids are hanging out, but I am pretty confident that sf has ceased to be in that position.

-- tei-council mailing list tei-council@lists.tei-c.org http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/tei-council

PLEASE NOTE: postings to this list are publicly archived

-- tei-council mailing list tei-council@lists.tei-c.org http://lists.lists.tei-c.org/mailman/listinfo/tei-council

PLEASE NOTE: postings to this list are publicly archived