Unimplemented features?

Charles McNulty charles at charlesmcnulty.com
Fri May 5 14:51:26 CEST 2006

Jon Daley wrote:
>     I believe there have been a half dozen offers for hosting 
> subversion (myself included).  Thomas or Charles wrote back to me and 
> said thanks, but it wasn't needed, and that they expected to switch to 
> SF's svn at some point.  And since I now mirror the cvs tree in 
> subversion for keeping my own local revisions merged, I offered to 
> publicize that, but that was also turned down.

Well, wasn't me, so it must have been Thomas, but from my perspective I 
definitely prefer a hosting provider such as sourceforge as opposed to a 
volunteer no matter how dedicated or experienced they are.  The 
advantages of sourceforge are that 1) They won't burn out from all the 
work associated with hosting 2) They won't decide to stop hosting over 
disagreement with the direction of the project or personality 
disagreements. 3) redundancy in terms of personel.  In other words if 
the volunteer hosting the project is abducted by aliens, we'd be up the 

Now obviously sf.net has some serious problems.  I don't know how a 
hardware problem could possibly in a million years lead to a month of 
downtime.  And I can't imagine how sf.net imagines that this is 
acceptable.  I'd be open to moving to something else like sf.net 
(perhaps savannah.org) or switching to svn, but there are too many 
potential pitfalls to handing off hosting to a volunteer, IMO.


More information about the Dev mailing list