Unimplemented features?

Bezaleel Support support at bezaleel.net
Fri May 5 16:43:43 CEST 2006

Colin Alston wrote:
> Charles McNulty wrote:
>> 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 crick.
>> 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.
> While that is totally understandable, and I do agree, you should 
> understand peoples frustrations since RoundCube is such a very 
> promising project.
> The only solution, although not in RC's favor, is that it is branched 
> by someone who does have the capacity to provide reliable development 
> services to people who are submitting patches or want access to 
> bleeding edge code so as to make patches as well as have proper bug 
> tracking.
> SourceForge is great, but it leaves a lot to be desired and there are 
> also many other tools which allow people to be more productive than 
> the in-house SF systems.
> If you're willing at all to hear peoples donations in terms of hosting 
> and repo, perhaps it would be at least worthwhile for people to put 
> their whole offer on the table.
If your concern is that a volunteer host will disappear/ go out of 
business/ trash the system/ refuse to maintain/ etc. - why not perhaps 
make use of several of the offers that are on the table? Provide perhaps 
a redundant setup where two, three, etc volunteers mirror/host the same 
content. If one volunteer decides that they despise RC and/or the the 
devs, then let that volunteer go take a long walk off a short pier and 
allow the other diligent volunteers to continue to maintain the system.

As I have never dealt with svn, I am not sure of what all is involved in 
such a setup - but was just a thought.

Kevin L.

More information about the Dev mailing list