3 ms·
Given the technical nature of the work, developers who can't jive with GitHub's policies can throw up a GitLab/Gitea server in an hour and evade censorship. And
by easton 6y ago
Given the technical nature of the work, developers who can't jive with GitHub's policies can throw up a GitLab/Gitea server in an hour and evade censorship. And of course, as we learned with youtube-dl, the issue isn't the code/commits (since everyone gets that with a git clone), it's the issues and PR history.
Any public file host has to deal with the DMCA, and (for now, barring any evil brought on by Microsoft), I'd bet on GitHub siding with the developer over the lawyers. They had lots of incentives to go the other way in the youtube-dl case and they didn't, and then they put a bunch of money in a fund if someone wants needs a lawyer to get their project back online.
- trasz 6y agoShould we perhaps invent a standard convention for keeping issues and PR history along with the usual source code in the repo itself?
- yissp 6y agohttps://fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/index.wiki https://fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/index.wiki from the sqlite guy.
- trasz 6y agoBut this is a whole another SCM instead of Git, isn’t it? What I’ve meant was just a convention within Git, same way we have a convention for README.md and “doc/“.
- account42 6y agoThere is git-bug [0]. Haven't had the time to evaluate it yet, so no idea how useful it is. [0] https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug
- trasz 6y agoIndeed, from a quick glance this looks like what I had in mind. Thanks! Now, how can we make it popular?