3 ms·
I can't speak for any of the core Django team, but as a user of Django I am glad that they took their time with this one. IMO github 'won' the social coding and
by mryan 14y ago
I can't speak for any of the core Django team, but as a user of Django I am glad that they took their time with this one. IMO github 'won' the social coding and source hosting battle a while ago, but I am glad that the Django team don't immediately jump to the new hot thing. There are a lot of things to consider with such a move, and moving too quickly would be a disservice to Django users.
Having said that, I am very glad they have moved. I think the previous Trac/SVN setup had more friction in terms of submitting, reviewing and accepting commits. Hopefully github will make this process more fluid.
- jolohaga 14y agoInteresting. I didn't know Django was on SVN until now. Why didn't they choose Bitbucket? I think it could have been as productive as Github.
- huxley 14y agoFrom following the discussion, the impression I got was that more core developers and contributors were using Github. Beyond the "key user" metric, the raw numbers also seem to lean in favour Github: there are 665 watchers on Github, 266 followers on Bitbucket; 56 forks on Github, 39 on Bitbucket.
- huxley 14y agoJust an addendum to the Github numbers, I hadn't realized Adrian Holovaty had renamed the previous Github repository to django-old, replacing it with the brand new repository (with the SVN history, etc). So if you look at django-old's numbers: https://github.com/django/django-old https://github.com/django/django-old Watchers: 4,030 Forks: 753 compared to Bitbucket's: Followers: 266 Forks: 39 So the raw numbers are dramatically in Github's favour.