4 ms·
This seems like a weird distinction to make. GitHub could equally delete single issues or single PRs or wiki pages or even single files in a repo. They don’t,
by akerl_ 6y ago
This seems like a weird distinction to make. GitHub could equally delete single issues or single PRs or wiki pages or even single files in a repo.
They don’t, but that they don’t isn’t because your GitHub repo is “baked into one thing”, it’s because they’ve chosen to apply the DMCA at the repo level rather than playing whack a mole with your content.
Using a mailing list archive instead of an issue list doesn’t change that dynamic. What changes it is that you’ve decided to use more targeted DMCA compliance for SourceHut, which is noteworthy. But the delta here is a policy delta, not a technological limitation on GitHub’s part.
- ddevault 6y agoBut on GitHub, the PRs and issues cannot exist independently of the git repository. They'd have to make substantial software changes to support this approach. Sure, they could do that, but - have they? No. SourceHut has.
- akerl_ 6y agoI’m not sure what you mean. GitHub has gotten a ton of (justified!) criticism because the issues/PRs are not stored in git (either in the main repo, like gh-pages branches, or in an associated repo, like GitHub repo wikis). The “changes” they’d need to make beyond their current DMCA implementation would be to restrict the “Code” tab, the Readme preview, and the git/ssh endpoint for that repo. Which would likely be a new feature, but given they already have the ability for a repo’s owner to totally disable PRs or issues, certainly wouldn’t be the kind of groundbreaking change you’re pitching it as.