Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>
>> Indeed, we haven't made any particular effort to encourage gborg
>> projects to move. I think it's a bit premature to hold a gun to
>> their heads.
>>
>
> Well that is not exactly true. We have been encouraging gborg projects
> to move for at least a year.
>
> What we haven't done is provided an easy means to do so.
>
> But frankly after seeing, working on and with pgFoundry I don't think
> pushing them there is a good choice either.
>
> Documentation is very sparse, bugs are rampant and I don't want to
> even consider
> the possible security issues involved with it.
>
> That being said, as an inclusive solution there really isn't anything
> else
> out there :(
>
>
I think that's overstating it a bit (even though I know you held back
;-) ). We have stomped on most of the significant bugs that have arisen
from our implementation, and gotten some fixes from upstream too. We do
have a couple of GForge devs who help us out. We have in fact been
pretty careful about security issues.
Frankly, what we need is someone with enough dedicated time and drive to
push the migration through. Ideally that would be someone who could work
fulltime for the several weeks I suspect a complete migration would
take. Unfortunately, I don't know of such a resource.
If we could get to be running pgFoundry on the latest GForge, with
PHP/CGI enabled project web pages, a database per project available, SVN
as well as CVS, and a known stable mailman release we'd be in excellent
shape.
I'd rather move forwards than back.
cheers
andrew
