Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Sourceforge subversion problem
03-11-2018, 06:20 AM
Post: #101
RE: Sourceforge subversion problem
How about 'Code', as it was before, if allowed.
Or 'Code (GitHub)', or 'Code - GitHub'.

Andy.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/andrewcouling
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-11-2018, 06:45 AM (This post was last modified: 03-11-2018 06:59 AM by TurboPT.)
Post: #102
RE: Sourceforge subversion problem
Ok, I renamed to: Code (GitHub)

I figured that would be fitting as it is an external link.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-11-2018, 08:06 AM
Post: #103
RE: Sourceforge subversion problem
The thing is that we will lose users this way, as people won't follow the link. If we had a git repository on there that was updated automatically whenever github was updated, that people finding the sourceforge site could fork then they could get the code. Seems like a win win scenario to me, can't see the objections

Tim
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-11-2018, 09:18 AM (This post was last modified: 03-11-2018 09:26 AM by TurboPT.)
Post: #104
RE: Sourceforge subversion problem
I don't mind coming back around to that, I'm just not sure of the "picture"?

I guess I've avoided anything new at SF at the moment due to their site issues. Andy and I both had issues visiting SF at different points yesterday!

If a git repository copy is put there, that being a clone of the 'master', where would a more stable branch (as we've talked about before) reside?
Would there be two git entries at SF: one for the master and another for the stable?

Another matter of consideration (beyond the repo), as GitHub can also handle releases, issues, wiki, etc. as SF can do ... is it really necessary to duplicate/manage project details across 2 sites (or even 3, including weberp.org)? Opinions? ... I could be naive on this aspect.

I was surprised to find a few popular project at SF that have external links to their source code too: (which is to say, no repository at SF)
Apache Open Office (to their own site)
Hibernate (to GitHub)
FileZilla (to their own site)

...but there are many other lesser-known projects with external code links without a SF repository as well.

However, I did see other projects that have the git repository reference on SF as you've mentioned too, the K.M., among many others.

So, very likely something to come back around and add.
As you've said, being a git cloned repository is no big deal as the SVN was since the git clone can be dropped and recreated.
SF availability is questionable at the moment, though I'm sure that they'll eventually work through the site issues.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-11-2018, 11:00 AM
Post: #105
RE: Sourceforge subversion problem
(03-11-2018 03:54 AM)TurboPT Wrote:  I added a "webERP at GitHub" tab (an external link) at SF.

Superb idea.

Phil Daintree
webERP Admin
Logic Works Ltd
http://www.logicworks.co.nz
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-11-2018, 06:50 PM
Post: #106
RE: Sourceforge subversion problem
(03-11-2018 09:18 AM)TurboPT Wrote:  I don't mind coming back around to that, I'm just not sure of the "picture"?

I guess I've avoided anything new at SF at the moment due to their site issues. Andy and I both had issues visiting SF at different points yesterday!

If a git repository copy is put there, that being a clone of the 'master', where would a more stable branch (as we've talked about before) reside?
Would there be two git entries at SF: one for the master and another for the stable?

It would be the full repository, whatever was wanted by the project.

Quote:Another matter of consideration (beyond the repo), as GitHub can also handle releases, issues, wiki, etc. as SF can do ... is it really necessary to duplicate/manage project details across 2 sites (or even 3, including weberp.org)? Opinions? ... I could be naive on this aspect.

The two main sites people go to for FLOSS projects are sourceforge and github. Most people here will have found the project by searching sourceforge originally. It makes sense to have a presence on both.

Quote:I was surprised to find a few popular project at SF that have external links to their source code too: (which is to say, no repository at SF)
Apache Open Office (to their own site)
Hibernate (to GitHub)
FileZilla (to their own site)

...but there are many other lesser-known projects with external code links without a SF repository as well.

However, I did see other projects that have the git repository reference on SF as you've mentioned too, the K.M., among many others.

So, very likely something to come back around and add.
As you've said, being a git cloned repository is no big deal as the SVN was since the git clone can be dropped and recreated.
SF availability is questionable at the moment, though I'm sure that they'll eventually work through the site issues.

Keeping a git repository on sourceforge requires no extra work apart from the setup bur provides another place for people to get the code. I don't see the downside, just the upside.

Tim
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-12-2018, 10:21 PM
Post: #107
RE: Sourceforge subversion problem
(03-11-2018 08:06 AM)falkoner Wrote:  updated automatically whenever github was updated
Tim

Tim,

Could the 'auto push' to SF this be achieved with a post-commit webhook?

Andy.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/andrewcouling
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-12-2018, 10:30 PM
Post: #108
RE: Sourceforge subversion problem
It could, but I would probably use a pre-push one, the principle is the same, but if it happens at the same time as the push to github then it would be synced.

Tim
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)