Hi,



my thoughts:



- The switch from bzr to git was supposed to potentially attract new

contributors because git is more widely used than bazaar. Even if it's

true, I don't think people interested in contributing to inkscape will

have any problem finding the code. Inkscape is an insanely popular and

known project, and whatever option we choose, the code will never be

further away than a google search for "inkscape official code

repository"*. Many projects are on code repos way less known than

gitlab, for instance git.gnome.org for gimp, and that will not prevent

any potential developper to find in 15 seconds she will have to type

"git clone git://git.gnome.org/gimp" to get started. So the "popularity"

of github vs gitlab should, imo, not matter much.



- I think we are right to pride ourselves for being FLOSS. In my

opinion, advocating in favor of open source, being part of SFC, etc,

means I would always favor using a FLOSS tool over a not-opensourced

one. So, philosophically speaking, Gitlab is a clear winner (but I'm not

religious about it, I won't stop contributing if we decide on github).



- Also, I do think the "big fish in a small pond" would actually be an

argument *in favor* of gitlab. It means that we might have more

possibilities of interactions with the gitlab people, more opportunities

to talk with them about our needs and what works great and works less

great, while if we find any quirks with github, we'll probably have to

stay with "that's how it works". That may also help gitlab itself

improve. So I agree we might find some things less "polished" than

github, but (1) we can do something about it, and/or (2) we probably can

talk to the people taking care of it.



- Whatever the choice, migrating after a while if it ends being a bad

choice (say, if we go to gitlab, but it timeouts all the time and no one

cares) will be easy.



- The big plus of github afaiu is/was the Travis CI, but if gitlab has

it too now ... maybe we should try it ?



- "Git is a *D*VCS, there is no real need to keep only one upstream

copy." => I'm a bit curious about how it would work if there are CI

stuff involved... can github reject a commit while testing it on travis,

even if the commit was originally pushed to lp and gitlab's tests

accepted it ?



--

Marc



* I'm also in favor of keeping an up-to-date mirror in github anyway so

that people with no googling skills can find it too ;) The README.md can

explain how to contribute



------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors

Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms.

With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE.

Training and support from Colfax.

Order your platform today. http://sdm.link/xeonphi

_______________________________________________

Inkscape-devel mailing list

Inkscape-devel@lists.sourceforge.net

https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-devel