Re: Proposal to shutdown pgFoundry

On Fri, May 20, 2011 12:20 pm, Stefan Kaltenbrunner wrote:
> On 05/20/2011 11:43 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> writes:
>>> 2011/5/20 Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org>:
>>>> When we shut it down, all projects will all go somewhere else, and
>>>> that
>>>> somewhere else might sound reliable to the people outside the
>>>> community.
>>>> That is the only concern of me. Getting rid of CVS is fine, and they
>>>> can
>>>> move their projects to git.postgresql.org, which would be excellent.
>>>> Still, is there a simple way that PostgreSQL infrastructure team can
>>>> provide hosting are for tarballs for ex-pgfoundry projects?
>>
>>> I think we'd want to try to avoid doing that as it would require
>>> policing to ensure inappropriate content wasn't uploaded.
>>
>> ... yeah, that's a problem.
>>
>>> Plus, people can always use SourceForge for distribution.
>>
>> If you drive people to sourceforge for distribution, what value is there
>> in git.postgresql.org?
>>
>> I need to figure out what to do with pg_filedump. All I need for it
>> is an SCM and someplace to put release tarballs. I'd prefer to use
>> git.postgresql.org, but if there's nowhere for tarballs, that's not
>> going to work.
>
> hmm tarballs are a really good point, not sure what to do there -
> provide some some minimal interface to push them to the mirror network
> or do we need something more fancy?
>
>

We need something. I need to be able to push buildfarm client tarballs
too, so Tom's not the only person who needs this.

Even more importantly, the mailings lists on pgfoundry are a critical
piece of the buildfarm infrastructure - that's how status notifications
get out to people like Tom. We also need lists for commit notifications
and members discussion.

I don't much like the idea of sending people off to sourceforge.

It's a pity GitHub doesn't have some of those extra features.

cheers

andrew