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

[Regina Obe]

Speaking as a sysadmin
We need to move off of SVN because we are pretty much the only project on it.  So I can shut it down or fully freeze it.

Speaking as a PostGIS Developer

 Everyone either prefers GIT or is indifferent between GIT / SVN (except possibly for Paul who may prefer SVN)
I personally like the disk saves, ability to feature branch locally etc.

I do not see the only purpose of Git is to use it in Github. If your experience of Git is only thru the glossy glasses that  Github provides you I feel you are missing out and should seek help for your addiction.

It's like saying PostgreSQL is useless unless you are using it in Amazon RDS.  Poppy talk.

>> Technically, anyone that opens a PR in those places should also open a 
>> ticket in trac, but nobody does because it means working twice for no 
>> reason.

> This is really only a problem for management.
> We want to know which changes to include in a release when we're at the release process.
> > development
> 
> I only check trac and Github. I'm not saying it's right, but I never 
> log in other platforms so those essentially don't exist for me.

Speaking as someone who often does the releases, I actually don't count that much on trac issues for feature notes.
People seemed pretty trained (except for Paul), to put in news worthy pieces in the NEWS file.
Hell if you want to link to your GitHub pull request in the NEWS and don't put in a corresponding trac ticket, that's fine with me.

I count on Trac for open bug issues, and I definitely don't want that on GitHub, cause I don't want every developer posting their issues on me unless they are willing to fix them themselves -- which is why we allow pull requests on GitHub and still will .
I get enough issues from mailing lists, trac, stack exchange, IRC

-- SPEAKING as a lover of Microsoft
I can't think of a better company to dominate the world -- they have an endless pile of cash
They are generally thoughtful to their customers.

Even so - a large expansive network fully controlled by one commercial entity I find a bit disturbing
And I'm not interested in being a full enabler of that.  Sure I'll use their services cause they are made available, but I don't want it to be my main source of food or how I view the world.

I want our primary GIT master under our control.

I know you guys think my concern for security is ill placed, but I do worry about stories like how Canonical GitHub repo was compromised and how Homebrew repo was compromised as well.  I just feel safer ours is a mirror.  Sure our main repo can get compromised as well, but its' not sitting in a juicy pot of stew with every other open source project that chooses Github as their master.


Thanks,
Regina