Re: debian github organization ?

[Ben Finney <ben+debian@benfinney.id.au>]

Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> writes:

> Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com> writes:
> > Agreed - it's really annoying to see everybody clamour for a
> > centralised single point of of failure for git hosting. :-(
>
> Funny, this is why I don't get why people are so upset that some use
> GitHub. Because of how Git works, the impact of lock-in is pretty much
> limited to the non-repository stuff (issues and so forth).

Yet it is exactly those lock-in features that is the basis for arguments
to put special effort into the centralised single point of failure.

For example, the centralised proprietary GitHub “pull request” is
presented as a reason to abandon a decentralised model:

Paul Tagliamonte <paultag@debian.org> writes:

> An entirely fair point, however, I also think it's quite rude to
> ignore the workflow they've chosen for contributions -- if they expect
> PRs, it might disrupt their workflow and result in a much harder time
> for them.

So upstream have chosen a proprietary lock-in service for their
workflow. That should not put any obligation on others to also submit to
proprietary lock-in.

-- 
 \     “I went to a restaurant that serves ‘breakfast at any time’. So |
  `\    I ordered French Toast during the Renaissance.” —Steven Wright |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney