Bryce Harrington wrote:
On Tue, Aug 30, 2005 at 09:03:21AM +0200, Ralf Stephan wrote:
Well, the first order of business is to evaluate as many different providers as possible, and build a matrix of what they support, how good the support appears to be, etc.
This is dependent on the versioning system.
True, however things are often not quite so cut and dried; we may find a given service willing or planning to add additional versioning systems.
This desire to change comes up a lot. IMHO, there should be a -compelling- reason to switch from SF. SF's warts, tho many, are familiar, and we have learned to work with them. Some of us have been SF members for years, long before Inkscape existed. The staff has always been very friendly to us.
IMHO again, we need better reasons than "it's slow" or "SF sucks." To justify such a painful move, it should not be just for parity, but for some system that is magnitudes above what we have. If such an incredible upgrade exists, I would be quite enthusiastic about moving to it.
For example, Tigris.org has Subversion, but what else does it have?
Does someone know if mailing list archives of closed SF projects stay available?
As far as I know, projects on SF are never closed, they just go to sleep. I think that is in their policy documents.
Bob