
The history behind the decision to move Python to GitHub - suraj
http://www.snarky.ca/the-history-behind-the-decision-to-move-python-to-github
======
raverbashing
> But to me, the development process is more important than worrying whether a
> cloud-based service publishes its source code

And that's basically it (and I agree with him)

Do you have a problem with Github? All the information you need is in your
clone of the Git repository.

(Ok, there are bug reports, wiki entries, but apparently those can be obtained
using their API as well)

~~~
carussell
I'm not a Python developer, so I'm only a bystander here, but Python is moving
from Mercurial and uses a patch-based workflow. Getting your changes into a
project that relies on patches is trivial; you just send them the patch.
GitHub doesn't support patches, however. The only way to get your changes
integrated upstream through GitHub is to file GitHub's version of a pull
request. And the only way to file a GitHub-style pull request is if it's
coming from another repo on GitHub.

Cannon writes:

> GitHub is not a walled garden [...] GitHub is going to be used for
> repository hosting and code reviews

The clincher is in the latter statement. Even though you may have the full
repo history on your own disk, that doesn't do anything to help you get your
changes back to the maintainers. In that case, GitHub _is_ a walled garden in
the same way that people talk about Facebook being one. That is, it's fine and
all if, say, your friend chooses to use it, but it makes some heavy-handed
choices about how you can communicate/collaborate with them; it puts up
barriers–deliberately–to make it onerous/impossible to use unless you're using
it, too.

GitHub gets by on providing some free services to those working in open source
and getting their goodwill in return. But GitHub's wall-y nature doesn't get
called out enough, and indeed, people often act like it doesn't exist.

~~~
raverbashing
> The only way to get your changes integrated upstream through GitHub is to
> file GitHub's version of a pull request

No

The Linux Kernel is on Github and only takes patches, not pull requests

~~~
Spivak
Correct, but no part of the Linux kernel development is done on GitHub. It's
nothing more than a republishing of the patch-based authoritative repository
hosed somewhere else. The issue is that if you want GH to be your
authoritative repository you're locked into GH's way of doing things -- which
isn't necessarily bad, but a valid complaint is that you have to be a user of
GH to contribute to projects hosted there.

~~~
raverbashing
> The issue is that if you want GH to be your authoritative repository you're
> locked into GH's way of doing things

You just push from your (private) authoritative repository to Github, and
you're free from "GH's way of doing things"

------
dragonsh
I feel whatever be the reason it was a wrong move to move Python to github
which is new sourceforge just more shiny. I hope the Python community get
together to support either kallithea or trac or gnu and move there.

In an open letter recently group of open source developers raised and
highlighted pitfalls of using such closed source for profit infrastructure
without community oversight. Also it shows the opaque nature of such services.
It's not wise to rely on goodwill of investors of github looking for profits.
Also from ethical point of view it's really bad moving to a non community for
profit infrastructure for a community driven project.

This is same mistake like moving from Python 2 to 3.

~~~
iolothebard
Try reading the article next time.

~~~
dragonsh
I read the article and the main reason for moving is wish of Guido and some
developers personally. I was following the pep for Kallithea and hoped it will
be picked up given Python is using mercurial which is already distributed and
at par with git in features and workflow.

Also GitHub is another sourceforge, when Python did not move to sourceforge
when 80-90% of developers were using it. I don't see why they want to move to
GitHub just for source code management now when roundup will still be self
hosted by Python. This is one of the reason I like gnu and gpl they not just
build open source but continue to uphold the principals.

~~~
warbiscuit
Not just on par, for those of us who want reliable cross platform behavior and
gui tools (TortoiseHg), git seems lacking compared to mercurial.

Github is pretty shiny and popular though :|

------
icefox
> there was no killer feature that GitLab had

This really is the crux of the argument and for the GitLab guys is really what
they should think hard about.

