[Sugar-devel] [Systems] Moving pootle to github

[Bernie Innocenti]

I'm very happy to hear that. Kudos!

On 06/09/13 06:13, Daniel Narvaez wrote:
> Something I would like to stress, aside from philosophical
> considerations, is that the new process is working. There is not a
> single patch stuck in the queue (couple of old ones from Walter but they
> are just blocked on another set he submitted, which is going to land soon).
> 
> 
> On 9 June 2013 11:51, Daniel Narvaez <dwnarvaez at gmail.com
> <mailto:dwnarvaez at gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>     On 9 June 2013 01:38, Bernie Innocenti <bernie at sugarlabs.org
>     <mailto:bernie at sugarlabs.org>> wrote:
> 
>         On 06/07/2013 09:10 AM, Daniel Narvaez wrote:
>         > No, just glucose. You can see the exact list of modules on
>         > https://github.com/sugarlabs/
> 
>         By the way, what is "sugarlabs", a shared account?
> 
> 
>     It's an organization
> 
>     https://github.com/blog/674-introducing-organizations
>      
> 
>         Wouldn't this subvert GitHub's philosophy that all forks are created
>         equal, by creating one that looks more official than the others?
> 
> 
>     In my experience the large majority of github repository has an
>     official repo, very visibly linked from the project official
>     website. For example
> 
>     http://nodejs.org/
> 
>     People fork the official repo and send patches through pull requests.
> 
>     Which is exactly what we are doing.
>      
> 
>         If it seems that this approach wouldn't be feasible for a
>         project with
>         many collaborators, check out http://git.kernel.org . Most of
>         the repos
>         under kernel/git/ are clones of the kernel tree with various patches
>         applied. The most "official" tree that I can think of is
>         kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git, the one maintained by Linus.
>         There are of
>         course many other public forks of the Linux kernel hosted on
>         other sites.
> 
> 
>     I can't think of a single github repository that follows the kernel
>     development model. I'm sure there but I'm also pretty sure it's not
>     the normal development model for github repositories.
>      
> 
>         I'm making the assumption that switching to GitHub was motivated
>         in part
>         by the desire to adopt the bazaar development style. If it's not the
>         case, then GitHub may not be a very good fit for a central
>         repository
>         shared by multiple committers.
> 
> 
>     If with bazaar development model you mean kernel like, I don't think
>     that was one of the reasons. But as I said I don't think github
>     pushes that model either. It's pretty similar to gitorious really,
>     just a better implementation of it :)
>      
>     In general I don't think kernel development practices are a good
>     model for our community, as proved by the attempt to push their
>     patch review practices and badly failing. We are a very different
>     kind of communities.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Daniel Narvaez


-- 
Bernie Innocenti
Sugar Labs Infrastructure Team
http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Infrastructure_Team