There is pros and cons of each.
Dennis
Pierre-Yves Chibon <pingou@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 02:34:28PM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:Miro Hrončok wrote:The reason is simple. Fedorahosted lacks features, is unplesant and need
byrocracy even to create a repository.
Creating a repository is actually the only time "bureaucracy" is required.
Giving write permissions just works over FAS. (There's a FAS group for every
repository that is created, the developer only needs to request group
membership through FAS and you can approve it, all self-service in FAS.)
Clones, commits, pushes etc. are plain git (or SVN or whatever you chose!
Fedorahosted is much more flexible than GitHub there) just as on GitHub or
anywhere else. A Trac site is automatically created along with the
repository if requested (you're expected to say in the repository request
whether you want Trac or not, normally you should always say "yes"), it has
bug trackers which work with FAS accounts (and Trac's issue tracker is no
worse than GitHub's, they're actually very similar), a repository browser,
and a wiki that you can edit (no "bureaucracy"). You also get a directory
for file releases below https://fedorahosted.org/releases/ that accepts SCP
uploads.
I really don't see what is missing there, apart from missing automation for
the one-time creation process.
You're forgeting, patch/code reviews, possibility to close or refer to a ticket
from the git commit, the possibility to easily follow a project and be informed
of its changes (yes, I know, you can create mailing list and hav e all the
commits and action from the trac be sent to said list, I already do this for
fedocal) and probably some more feature I'm forgetting.
Anyway, did you see the link in the footer? The one that says 'pkgdb'?
Pierre
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
