[postgis-devel] PSC Vote: Move from svn to Git (and by git I mean Gitea)

[Sandro Santilli]

On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 02:57:54AM -0700, Paul Ramsey wrote:
> > On Oct 23, 2019, at 2:51 AM, Sandro Santilli <strk at kbt.io> wrote:
> > 
> > This is actually the reason why we want to keep Trac.
> > Activity should be _only_ review/planned on Trac.
> 
> And a workflow that dupes everything doesn’t bother you? It is one
> of the many many roadblocks we place in the way of contributors.

Yes, it would bother me, as an external contributor, if I was asked
to create a Trac ticket _in addition_ to a PR sent on GitLab/Gitea/GitHub.

But this cannot be solved by reducing the number of channels from which
we accept contributions. We also accept patches on the mailing list, but we
know we want things to be on Trac in order to be correctly planned/managed.

If we moved to GitHub, could I still, as an OSGeo User, send a patch
to the mailing list, or file a merge request via my own git
repository, without having to file an issue on GitHub ?

> I hate to see all the effort lavished on all this programmer wankery
> that could be eliding by going to the place where the developers
> are.

We are there already.

> It’s not like we’re locked in, we’ve moved before, we’ll
> move again.
>
> collaboration than the places they replaced. Recently that metric has
> changed to instead wanting places that provide ideological consistency
> for a subset of the PSC.
> 
> CSV/nothing - Refractions
> SVN/custom - Google Code
> SVN/trac - OSGeo

It's interesting to note that none of the above migrations went
from free and self-hosted system to proprietary system:

   CVS -> SVN        -- both free software, both self-hosted, old to new
   nothing -> custom -- proprietary software from nothing
   custom  -> trac   -- proprietary software to self hosted free software

What is being proposed by Regina's motion here is:

   SVN -> GIT        -- both free software, both self-hosted, old to new

This is the what's in the proposal, only for code.

What you are saying is that you don't to take this (small)
step without taking the (bigger) step of also:

  1. Have code hosted by a corporation.
  2. Have tickets managed by a proprietary technology and hosted by
     the corporation owning it.

Proprietary software is like a drug. Once you start using it, moving
out won't be easy. OSGeo recently had even payed to buy more of such
drug (for lifting some limits of GDAL CI). It gets in your brain, we'd
start needing to _learn_ how to use those tools, and all that
knowledge will be for a technology we'll never own. Ideological ?

--strk;