[Sugar-devel] Issue tracking on Github?

[Dave Crossland]

Hi!

On 4 April 2016 at 00:50, Devin Ulibarri <devin at ulibarri.website> wrote:

> On 04/04/2016 12:35 AM, Dave Crossland wrote:
> >     Here is why:
> >     1. Control. The community would be able to do what they wish with
> their
> >     data. (the other benefits really come from this one)
> >
> >
> > Most of the data on Github servers, and all the data that is uploaded to
> > the servers by the community, is available to the community in full and
> > unrestricted (and raw) form via the Github API.
> >
> > There is a software freedom problem with github.com <http://github.com>,
> > since it provides proprietary javascript software to run on your
> > browser; but for me this software is pretty trivial and personally I
> > don't mind it.
>
> I was more concerned with the amount of latitude that the services
> SugarLabs.
>
> For example (to make point more clear), if you had your own server would
> you rather download and use Wordpress software? Or use a WordPress as a
> service hosted on someone else's computer?


For myself, I haven't run my own servers in a long time. They just got
hacked, and it stopped being fun and became labor that I wasn't being paid
to perform, so in 2006 I stopped and move to a "shared hosting" provider (
dreamhost.com) and installed WordPress there. And I still got hacked at the
wp database level.

So today for hosting and serving all websites that I administer, I prefer
to use 'static site generator' blog/website cms, and specifically jeykll on
pages.github.com; the jeykll software that runs on Github's servers is
available as public libre software so I can replicate the hosting
environment, and the 'pull request' collaboration model is great.


> >     2. Avoid "Lock in". Probably, now we think "we have the code, we can
> >     pack our bags at any time we want", but as we use 3rd party services
> we
> >     are investing more and more--and would probably be reluctant to move
> if
> >     GitHub were to "go rogue" (advertisements, privacy problems, who
> knows
> >     what they will think of next problems). Instead, we would probably
> just
> >     adapt and adapt until--suddenly--the atmosphere became unbearable.
> >
> >
> > SourceForge.org is exactly the nightmare scenario you describe
> > -
> http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/05/sourceforge-grabs-gimp-for-windows-account-wraps-installer-in-bundle-pushing-adware/
> > - and Github is widely admired in the floss community as an antithesis
> > of sourceforge. Another large host of libre-software projects,
> > code.google.com <http://code.google.com>, was shut down in the last
> > year, with tools provided to migrate to Github.
>
> Yes, I had SourceForge in mind...
>
> > The nature of git and the github API is that migrating to another system
> > is easy enough, and while it is certainly possible that they could just
> > turn everything off and we'd lose data stored only on their servers, it
> > seems extremely unlikely to me that people of good will would do such a
> > thing. I expect that if and when Github is shut down, it will provide
> > tools to migrate.
>
> Migrating code is easy, but it is also valuable to have the data of the
> issues as well when possible. (one could download pages as HTML, but
> that would be laborious)


The Github API provides the data of the issues; there are several 3rd party
issue tracking UIs that build a proprietary software business on top of it.

https://developer.github.com/v3

Eg https://huboard.com https://www.zenhub.io https://waffle.io
https://codetree.com


> >     3. It occurs to me that, if we maintain an option to issue bug
> reports
> >     anonymously (or even under an pseudonym) that we would be protecting
> >     data of minors. I do not want to contribute much more to a world
> where
> >     minors must identify themselves and thus all they say and do on the
> >     internet at 13 yrs. old is available to people to see when they are
> 40
> >     yrs. old.
> >
> >
> > Github allows pseudonym accounts :)
>
> Yes, but we are still asking kids to sign up with a service that they
> may have otherwise had no interest in signing up for.


I am proposing to ask kids to sign up with Github because I strongly expect
that they have a wider interest in signing up for it - because almost all
other libre software projects that they will interact with are currently on
the service.


> "Welcome to
> SugarLabs, now sign up for GitHub". So GitHub gets the data for the
> student's email (I cannot remember if real name is required, but it
> almost does not matter b/c they can change their policy at any time)


Github does not require real names.

If we are concerned about educating children about maintaining
pseudonymity, we can recommend using http://mailinator.com or a
github-specific disposable email account; but I don't really understand
your concern about Github having a student's email. I observe a lot of
young people with emails like DaveCrosslandRocks at gmail.com, so inevitably
as they grow up they will need to get a more formal email.


> >     This all being said, I have no technical know-how to fix the broken
> >     system. And the reason I use GitHub is because that was the system
> that
> >     was introduced to me. If the software on the Sugar server gets
> fixed, I
> >     will happily participate in that one.
> >
> >
> > Well, this is sort of the point. The software on the sugar server is
> > functioning fine (modulo a moderation queue misconfiguration :) and
> > there was already an effort to move to Github.
>
> I am confused. I thought something was not / is not working...
>

What is not working is not the functioning of the software, but the
incoherence between having issues in one system (that is obscure) and code
in another system - the by-far-most-widely-used libre software development
service.


> The reason I am using GitHub and not Sugar Server is because that was
> the solution introduced to me.


:)


> >     Well, 4. If we can fix the problem and try to improve whatever
> software
> >     libre we are running server-side, we will be contributing to the
> >     advancement of software libre tools for the entire community (even
> if we
> >     are just filing bug reports, etc).
> >
> >
> > Sugar is in the business of developing educational application-level
> > software, and not wifi driver firmware software, nor software project
> > hosting software.
>
> Just like we would appreciate it if people used Sugar software and sent
> in bug reports when they ran into problems, I know that developers of
> server-side libre git solutions would appreciate having more members of
> the community try their stuff and send in our thoughts and other
> contributions. ...it is encouraging for them, at the very least.
>

No doubt :)

Well, we have 2 proposals for consolidation, one to move totally to Github
and one to move totally away from Github. How to decide? :)

-- 
Cheers
Dave
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/attachments/20160404/3b83f4c7/attachment.html>