[sane-devel] [janitorial] Relocating the SANE Project
markus.heiser at darmarit.de
Tue Jan 9 15:49:15 UTC 2018
nothing 'new' just my 2cent ...
> Am 08.01.2018 um 08:46 schrieb Olaf Meeuwissen <paddy-hack at member.fsf.org>:
> Dear all,
> # Project members explicitly BCC:d, just in case they don't subscribe.
> # Project admins CC:d to make sure they take note ;-)
> # Replies to the list, please.
> Since 2003-09-06, the SANE Project has been kindly hosted on Debian's
> Alioth. The Debian project has deprecated this service and intends
> to discontinue[*] it when Debian Wheezy becomes EOL. While that seems
> to be slated for 2018-05-31, the Alioth wiki page's News section
> states 2018-05-01 for Alioth itself and 2018-02-01 for mailing lists.
> [*]: It is not quite clear what that exactly entails but at best the
> service will become read-only.
> A Debian-backed GitLab-based replacement has been announced in beta
> and it looks like there may be a temporary continuation of the mailing
> lists but *nothing* will be migrated automatically. Everything has
> to be done explicitly.
> That is, if we don't act, the SANE Project will no longer be able to:
> - communicate via the mailing lists
> - push commits to its official git repositories
> - update the bug and feature requests trackers
> - update its website
> So we have to move some place else for our project hosting but where?
> The Debian-backed GitLab-based replacement is one option. Two others
> are GitLab.com and GitHub.com. None of these provides support for
> mailing lists so we need something else for that.
about mailing-lists ...
SANE maintainer & code-contriubutor POV:
- con: ML must be maintained
- con: Pull Request are 'local & handmade' no (public) CI for PR & discussion
rare visitors POV:
- pro: No git-hoster (github.com or gitlab.com) account needed / just a mail to ML
IMO overall: maintain issue tracker, PRs and ... from a git-hoster in
parallel with a ML is a lot of work and mostly confusing. Thats why
I would recommend to drop the ML when moving to a git-hoster. The drawback;
all contributors (even rare visitors) will need a account by the git-hoster.
Another drawback: the old history of the ML will be lost.
So IMO this must be the first decision; drop ML or search for an alternative.
> Migrating to Debian's
> temporary continuation is one option. Any other suggestions? As for
> the website, all three (will) have support for *static* webpages. The
> trackers are covered by the issue systems of all three.
> : https://wiki.debian.org/Alioth#Deprecation_of_Alioth
> : https://wiki.debian.org/LTS
> : https://wiki.debian.org/Alioth#News
> : https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2017/12/msg00003.html
> : https://wiki.debian.org/Alioth/MailingListContinuation
> : https://salsa.debian.org
> : https://gitlab.com
> : https://github.com
> You may remember that I set up an *unofficial* SANE Project group on
> GitLab.com to play around with GitLab CI that mirrors the project's git
> repositories on Alioth. We could use that. I have also created a stub
> on GitHub.com and two on Debian's GitLab (which enforces a
> *-team naming convention for groups :-() to reserve the names.
> : https://gitlab.com/sane-project
> : https://github.com/sane-project
> : https://salsa.debian.org/sane-team
> : https://salsa.debian.org/sane-project-team
> I am personally in favour of using something we could in principle run
> ourselves. That would rule out GitHub.com.
What I do: I host my public repos at github. Locally I have a self hosted
gitlab instance. It is very easy to move from github to gitlab including
issue tracker and other meta data.
What I mean: if you decide for github.com and there comes a day you are
pissed of by, it is easy to move from github.com to gitlab.com
or to a self hosted gitlab instance.
> Also, it is not clear yet
> when website hosting becomes possible or to what extent Debian's GitLab
> instance will provide CI runners (needed to publish the website), so
> *my* preference is GitLab.com (steering clear of its enterprise-only
> What are your preferences? Feel free to mention other options.
As said I'am using self-hosted gitlab and github.com. For public
things I prefer github.com over gitlab.com. My impression is, that
there are more potential contributors on github.com because its
Yes, I know there are static pages with github.io but I don't
like them. To often I see non-reproducible errors where URLs
are not working (very strange behavior I have seen there ..
is it only to me? .. I don't know).
Another "pro" for gitlab.com I see is omniauth, so rare contributors
can use their github.com account to login gitlab.com:
At the end I have to say, that I like to prefer the gitlab way.
Anyway, the truth is that github.com is more popular. As a
result the number of potential contributors is larger and this
results in a much more dynamic development.
Hope that gives new arguments for a tradeoff.
-- Markus --
> Hope this helps,
> Olaf Meeuwissen, LPIC-2 FSF Associate Member since 2004-01-27
> GnuPG key: F84A2DD9/B3C0 2F47 EA19 64F4 9F13 F43E B8A4 A88A F84A 2DD9
> Support Free Software https://my.fsf.org/donate
> Join the Free Software Foundation https://my.fsf.org/join
> sane-devel mailing list: sane-devel at lists.alioth.debian.org
> Unsubscribe: Send mail with subject "unsubscribe your_password"
> to sane-devel-request at lists.alioth.debian.org
More information about the sane-devel