On 19-09-12 20 h 35, Scott Kitterman wrote: > > > On September 12, 2019 5:30:24 PM UTC, Sam Hartman <hartmans@debian.org> wrote: >> >> I'm trying to move a thread from -devel. >> >> Ian Jackson responded [1] to part of a consensus discussion on Git >> recommendations. I had said that I think we recommend against the use >> of non-free services like Github but do not forbid their use. >> Ian disagreed with this recommendation. >> >> I responded [2] noting that around 7% of the packages with a vcs-git in >> unstable are hosted on Github. >> >> Ian said [3] that he was confident if we had a GR to forbid use of >> services >> like Github it would pass. >> >> He proposed the following text for such a GR. >> >> I think such a discussion is better on -project. >> >> [1]: >> https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/23927.51367.848949.15475@chiark.greenend.org.uk >> [2]: >> https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/tslwoedy93e.fsf_-_@suchdamage.org >> [3]: >> https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/23930.17192.131171.455527@chiark.greenend.org.uk >> >> >> Subject: Free Software Needs Free Tools >> >> No Debian contributor should be expected or encouraged, when working >> to improve Debian, to use non-free tools. This includes proprietary >> web services. We will ensure this, insofar as it is within Debian's >> collective control. >> >> For example, Vcs-Git fields in source packages must not refer to >> proprietary git code management systems. Non-Debian services are >> acceptable here so long as they are principally Free Software. >> >> We encourage all our upstreams to use Free/Libre tools. >> >> We recognise that metadata in Debian which describes the behaviour >> of those outside our community, for example fields which refer to >> upstream source management systems, may (in order to be accurate) >> still need to refer to proprietary systems. > > It's based on a false premise. No one is forced to use any VCS to maintain Debian packages. If you don't want to talk to GitHub, send a patch to the BTS While I do sympathise with the idea of not having Debian package on Github, I have to agree with Scott here. I think I would end up voting against such a GR because the use of Git isn't mandatory. If we already had a GR enforcing the use of Git, I think it would only make sense to make the use of salsa.debian.org mandatory. It seems we aren't there yet though. -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Louis-Philippe Véronneau ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋ pollo@debian.org / veronneau.org ⠈⠳⣄
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature