From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F76113888F for ; Thu, 8 Oct 2015 15:27:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 18525E07D5; Thu, 8 Oct 2015 15:27:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 80A80E07D2 for ; Thu, 8 Oct 2015 15:27:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.0.12] (aftr-37-201-214-189.unity-media.net [37.201.214.189]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: hasufell) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 61B9F33FEDE for ; Thu, 8 Oct 2015 15:27:07 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Call for Agenda Items -- Council Meeting 2015-10-11 To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org References: <1904237.nU16iSOlTl@kailua> <20150930204510.7e0bd29f.mgorny@gentoo.org> <20151008154237.c5b94b546444d7204ab91a98@gentoo.org> <56166864.2050204@gentoo.org> <9C591B75-DE0D-4AB6-8A6E-89FA178513BF@gentoo.org> <5616855D.8000106@gentoo.org> From: hasufell X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N1010 Message-ID: <56168B47.5050807@gentoo.org> Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2015 17:27:03 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5616855D.8000106@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: b728a362-ce66-4468-911e-e9c975fcc100 X-Archives-Hash: a130517c322156fe714f5b28ba524459 On 10/08/2015 05:01 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote: > > So perhaps it was unwise for us to get into a situation where either 1) > we violate the Social Contract or 2) we have to surmount a technically > difficult situation. > Sorry to jump in without contributing anything useful, but this has been really going on for too long. We do not violate the Social Contract in any way. Anyone is free to fork gentoo and serve it on mirrors which run totally proprietary software and accept contributions there. But gentoo does _not_ depend on that infrastructure, because we still have our own mirrors and contribution platforms. If people use alternative platforms, then that is their own choice. And a lot of gentoo developers and overlays do that since years (you'd have to shut all of them down, including the gentoo github organization). However, it has never deprecated our own infrastructure channels and as long as that is true, all these "social contract violated" mails are pure FUD. So yes, 2) is correct, 1) not. So, now to the useful part: In case infra cares, there's an alternative solution to gitlab which is called gogs [0]. Previously it was lacking pull request support and because of that it was pretty useless as a contribution platform. But that has been implemented now [1]. The only deal-breaker left are performance problems with repositories which have a huge amount of folders (like gentoo) [2]. It is very easy to deploy and there are numerous docker images [3][4] available. It also supports Github OAuth, which will make it painless for drive-by contributors. [0] http://gogs.io/ [1] https://github.com/gogits/gogs/issues/5 [2] https://github.com/gogits/gogs/issues/1518 [3] https://github.com/gogits/gogs/tree/master/docker [4] https://github.com/hasufell/docker-gentoo-gogs omg... those are all hosted on github! social contract to the rescue