| 1 |
On Sun, Apr 12, 2015 at 05:54:36PM +0300, Andrew Savchenko wrote: |
| 2 |
> Right now there is no hard dependency on github or travis, of |
| 3 |
> course. But present pathway worries me: with current pace at some |
| 4 |
> point we _will_ depend on travis or github too much. Then they may |
| 5 |
> change their terms of service or license argeement, or just shut |
| 6 |
> down the whole service (as Google recently shut down Google Code). |
| 7 |
> And then we will be in a great trouble. And then it may be too late |
| 8 |
> to change anything. I want to avoid this, that's all. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
It may take some work, but I do not think we could reach a point where |
| 11 |
nothing could be changed. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Remember that, unlike cvs, every git clone, by default, has all of the |
| 14 |
history of the repository, so all we would have to do is find another |
| 15 |
place to host the repository and push it there. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> What we should really do is to develop our own QA tools or use |
| 18 |
> existing free ones on our own infrastructure, thus that Gentoo |
| 19 |
> development may continue to be independent and unbiased. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
This is more likely once the main Gentoo ebuild repository is migrated |
| 22 |
to git. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
> Please understand that I'm grateful for all people improving |
| 25 |
> Gentoo, including Michał, for their hard work. But we should not |
| 26 |
> solely rely on third-party proprietary solutions (travis is a |
| 27 |
> github lock-in) because of convenience. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
wrt travis-ci, why not contribute code to it so that isn't a github |
| 30 |
lock-in? Have you checked to see if the authors are opposed to that |
| 31 |
kind of contribution? |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
I think all of these extra solutions are coming up because folks are |
| 34 |
frustrated with the current status of our main portage tree not being |
| 35 |
under git. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
> Best regards, |
| 38 |
> Andrew Savchenko |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
William |
Archives