Re: github mirror of lilypond?

[Urs Liska]

Am Sonntag, den 19.01.2020, 07:20 +0100 schrieb Werner LEMBERG:
> > While that may be true, there are already GNU projects using GitHub
> > as their host, for example gnucash and gnuradio.
> 
> Gnucash uses github as a mirror only, see
> 
>   https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Git#code.gnucash.org
> 
> But gnuradio admittedly uses github.  I'm 100% sure that if RMS knew
> that he would ask them immediately to move the source to a host that
> is more GNU-compliant.
> 
> However, there is nothing bad with mirroring at github, so it's OK if
> LilyPond does the same.

Considering the start of this thread I think there should be some
automatic way of keeping such a mirror up-to-date. It has happened more
than once that people came to think this *is* the code base and try to
patch it.

> 
> > As it stands, GitLab would probably be a more viable candidate to
> > look at than GitHub.
> 
> I agree.  IMHO, the main repository should stay at Savannah, though.

One consideration that hasn't been mentioned this time is that GitHub's
terms of service allow them to discontinue support for a given project
for any reason without notice.

However, I also count to the group of people who would strongly prefer
a more convenient and more welcoming way of contributing. Not in terms
of the review process. While having run into that wall more than once I
agree that it's important to have that tedious kind of process. 
The main advantage of Github and its clones (Gitlab, Gitea) I see over
the current process is a) that the code review is done on the actual
code, if you will, and integrated with the comments, and b) that when a
patch is accepted it can be simply merged (or squashed with/without
merge commit). I'm always feeling insecure when basically redoing my
patch before pushing to staging.

Urs

> 
> 
>     Werner
>