Unimplemented features?

Brett Patters - Roundcube Forum Admin brett at roundcubeforum.net
Fri May 5 17:30:11 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.
>
Well, one option that is a great alternative to SF is OSUOSL.  It's the 
Oregan State University Open Source Lab.  Since RC is OSS, why not host 
it at OSL for free?  phpBB just recently made the switch there :)

Now, they offer SVN (with anonymous access) and I can say that they're 
run from a University.  So it's not just going to go away.  Nor will any 
differences impact them in their decision to host.  But, they do have 
requirements.  Like they want to directly impact the OSU campus.  While 
we can't do that right away, we could swing it to make it OSU's premier 
webmail system :) ;)

So check them out.  I think it's a very viable alternative.  If nothing 
else, the SVN repo can be stored there and the site elsewhere.  It's 
something to think about.  It wouldn't be immediate, you'd have to apply 
for space and such, but I can't see them turning us down other than for 
the fact that we don't directly impact the OSU community.  But that 
doesn't mean we shouldn't try!! :)

--
Brett Patterson
Roundcube Forum Admin
www.roundcubeforum.net




More information about the Dev mailing list