Re: Git Packaging Round 2: SHOULD Not or MUSt NOT Github
On September 15, 2019 1:20:38 AM GMT+02:00, Scott Kitterman <debian@kitterman.com> wrote:
>> Besides this, there's something else I don't understand. How much
>effort
>> is it to use a free software based platform? It's not as if Github
>was
>> so much nicer than Gitlab (at least not anymore). What is it that
>people
>> hate about Gitlab so much, that they feel like they must use some
>> non-free platform, even if they know some of us will hate it?
>
>I don't know. I don't use GitHub except as needed to support
>collaboration
>with others that use it. I think that 7% is too large a number just to
>assume
>there's not a reason.
Speaking for myself, I'm currently using github as git repository for streamlink because salsa wasn't there when I started its packaging, and I was already familiar with it.
I could have swithed over to salsa before but didn't. For sure, I don't mind about switching now and probably will do.
I consider salsa as a comparable alternative to github functionality wise now, with the benefit that the git repo used for package development being internal to debian (in constrast to lost VCS of old packages that got lost)
Now that there is salsa, I guess many package could move to it.
Maybe a reason to use github, is travis.ci that can be used with github only IIRC. But I'm not using that functionality with debian package repository anymore in my case. Salsa gitlab's CI can be an alternative but for me debci is sufficient. and I run sbuild before pushing/releasing a version.
--
Alexis Murzeau
Reply to: