Re: RFC: Moving to github

Harald,

On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 3:19 PM, Harald Kipp <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> > The only one that can be called Linux is Linus tree, anything else needs
> > qualifiers such as "fork that does that" or "Android". As I said earlier,
> > there will always be forks, we don't really need to force them into
> > existence :)
>
> Yes, local forks. I'd like to have them available in the public.
>
>
>
You want Github with pull requests. That's the website's ideal workflow :)
Would be pretty cool if we could get gerrit, but I think pull requests
allows comments, so it's reviewed the same.



> > If we do say, create a repository for each Arch, it would only be natural
> > to start getting rid of the arch independent layers such as GPIO,
> typedefs,
> > configuration system, etc. Unmergeable code would soon follow and Nut/OS
> > advantages would start to fade.
>
> No, you got me wrong here, see above. Unmergeable code will appear, no
> question, like it appeared in Android. But that's not a real problem.
> Both, Android and distris based on Linus' master have specific
> advantages and can run on different platforms.
>
>
I don't see a problem with it then, you say incompatible public trees and I
call them forks. But the official one is github.com/harald/ethernut, no
question about it. You are our project manager, no running from it hehe.
Really, I can't think of any one project that doesn't have an official
repository.


AFAIK the only thing we are using from SF that github doesn't have is the
file release management.
We could keep SF account for that and move the rest to github.

Github has CI afaik.
_______________________________________________
http://lists.egnite.de/mailman/listinfo/en-nut-discussion