Unimplemented features?

Randy Noval randy at sermo.net
Fri May 5 15:05:23 CEST 2006

Charles McNulty wrote:
> 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.

To throw in my .02 USD (sadly, worth even less than before), the same 
could be said about the main developers. And isn't a CVS system designed 
to handle multiple people working on the same project? To enhance the 
community for this OSS, I think I fail to see the importance of locking 
it down to one system (i.e. SF.net).

That said, there must be an "official" version, and that can be 
maintained by the developers on SF.net, but I don't see a reason why 
there can't be an exact copy running on one or many volunteers' servers 
to enable access and updates for multiple contributers. The developers 
can pick and choose what changes they want to introduce to the 
"official" product without much effort (once SF.net SVN is going).

This can work the same way a wiki does, sure any one person can cause 
annoyance, but that is quickly alleviated by the many people working 
hard to keep this project going.

As a note of huzzah, I recently checked my mail in front of a number of 
non-techie, biz types and they were all v.impressed ("ooh, that looks 
nice, what email program are you using?"). great work all!


More information about the Dev mailing list