[Qgis-psc] Moving the issue queue to github

[Nathan Woodrow]

Hey Paolo,

I don't see any major risks staying on GH at the moment. Git (not GitHub)
lets just just move the repo if something bad every happens, as simple as:

git push newplace

and mailing everyone to update the location in there local copy.

Moving tickets should also not be a issue as GH are good and provide APIs
for all that. It's not in their best interest for lock people in to much as
it's a bit nasty and people will tend to look down on that.


On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 5:46 PM, Paolo Cavallini <cavallini at faunalia.it>
wrote:

> Il 16/03/2016 21:12, Tim Sutton ha scritto:
> > Hi Paolo
> >
> > A couple of questions and thoughts:
> >
> > 1) Will integrations like travis work with GL?
> > 2) Are you proposing to use their hosted service, or a self hosted copy
> > of the community edition?
>
> I'm not proposing anything, just analysing the various opportunities.
> What I'm mostly worrying about is to be trapped into an infrastructure
> we have no control over. Your argument about the costs of migrating from
> GH to GL worry me a bit: one powerful argument towards moving to GH was
> that with git everyone has the full repo, so in case anything goes wrong
> we could always rebuild our infrastructure.
> In other words: I would feel safer if we had a quick way out of GH.
> But maybe I'm overanxious, so if I'm the only one seeing this as a
> danger, just disregard my notes.
> All the best.
> --
> Paolo Cavallini - www.faunalia.eu
> QGIS & PostGIS courses: http://www.faunalia.eu/training.html
> _______________________________________________
> Qgis-psc mailing list
> Qgis-psc at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-psc
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/attachments/20160317/baa66056/attachment.html>