On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 12:08:21PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 11:54 AM, Markos Chandras <hwoarang@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> > This is the kind of policies that kill user contributions. I am very
> > sad to witness this once again.
> >
> 
> I have mixed feelings for this very reason.  The concept of accepting
> contributions on github is an EXCELLENT one.  The problem is that it
> is proprietary, which creates division, and could potentially create
> problems down the road (no way to know - the sorts of things that can
> happen anytime you depend on proprietary software).
 
If github were to go down, all you would have to do is use a command
similar to the one given in the first message of this thread to switch
upstream to another location. I would argue that there really isn't a
hard dependency on github in the same way there would be if they were
using some centralized vcs such as svn.

I think this is a pretty weak argument for systems that use distributed
vcs's like git.

> > I will take care of the github mirroring myself. For those who will
> > merge pull requests on github, please take extra care to resolve the
> > merges properly.
> >
> 
> So, first, THANK YOU!
 
 If we are going to take this stance, should we consider removing all
 packages from the tree that have their upstream on github?

 William