to git or not to git

[Stefano Maffulli]

On Mon, Aug 27, 2018 at 11:36 PM Alessandro Rubini <rubini at gnudd.com> wrote:

> So, besides self-hosting (unfeasible for whole-kernel repos) I moved
> to github. Well, not using it other than as a git repo why should I
> care that the code (that I do not use) is not free?


if you're not using the other pieces of github (issues, wiki, projects,
etc) I don't see why one should care that the code distributing the content
of your repository is non-free. The underlying git tool is free, your data
and repository history is distributed because of git's nature, and you own
it too. It would be different if you used the other tools, because those
are proprietary and hard to move data around.


> Maybe because I contribute visibility to that specific unfree provider,


you sure would contribute to its network effect... hard choice to make
here. When OpenStack moved off of Launchpad/bzr for example, they decided
to self-host git+gerrit but used GitHub exactly to help discoverability of
the project.


> but they were "friendly" guys.
>

Were they really? They didn't have had a clear understanding of what free
software/open source was, at least at the beginning where they happily
promoted 'forking' of any project hosted there, even those without a proper
license.



> Now, they are microsoft. Same people. Same site. Different owner,
> different money-flow.  Shall I (we) change attitude? Most smart people
> say no, that nothing changed.


I'm in the "Nothing changed" camp: they where not friendly before and
neither are the new owners. To be clear, they were (and are) not hostile
either.


> How does the free software community feels in this respect?
>

You need a larger sample :)

/stef
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fsfe.org/pipermail/discussion/attachments/20180828/07e8d952/attachment.html>