[scrollaway]

> In 10 years time, Github may be the tired old service that gets acquired by a hedge fund that decides to monetize their repos. Such things are part of the corporate lifecycle.

So fix it in 10 years. Git makes that easy.

Point me to a good alternative to github that matches all your ideals. A free alternative to github - free as in beer, unless you're willing to fund this effort yourself, of course?

We migrated one of our projects from Sourceforge to Github, and all the stallmen came out of their rock to tell us how Github is evil, how Savannah is the only true alternative, pah. "Absolute freedom of software" is nice but it's not the only requirement. Savannah has the usability of a rusty wrench and will probably shut down without warning long before Github "turns evil".

Some people are just so far detached from reality when suggesting that stuff isn't perfect. Github is pretty damn amazing. If you want to use foss alternative like Gitlab, more power to you, but that doesn't make them ideal in every situation.

[yellowapple]

> Point me to a good alternative to github that matches all your ideals. A free alternative to github - free as in beer, unless you're willing to fund this effort yourself, of course?

Gitlab? Savannah (of the nongnu.org variety)? Bitbucket? Gitorious? A basic VPS with SSH and git?

[carussell]

The source for Bitbucket is no more available than that for GitHub.

http://atlassian.bitbucket.org/

[yellowapple]

The only explicitly-stated condition was "free as in beer", which BitBucket is for even private repos. BitBucket also has a self-hosted equivalent, though said equivalent is not, alas, free-as-in-beer.

The implicit free-as-in-speech condition is adequately fulfilled by other alternatives, like (as I mentioned) Gitlab and (IIRC) GNU Savannah (along with - again - just installing git on an SSH-able server).

[sytse]

At GitLab you are very welcome. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

[scrollaway]

Props guys, I think you do an incredible job. GitLab is in fact a reasonable alternative, I should have mentioned it in my post.

The reason we went to Github rather than Sourceforge is because of the community. Nethertheless, I think it's fairly foolish to focus on the platform (in the case here of archiving) - it's just a host. Stuff goes on domain 1 instead of domain 2. In either case it's still open source, the archives are all there, git is decentralized and perfect for the job.

[carussell]

Contradictory signals in your rationale here. It comes off as if you're filling in a post-hoc justification.

Is it just an archive or isn't it? If it is, what's so important about the community, then?

It's fine that you chose what you did, of course. It's just that that in your defending it, you can't seem to decide whether you want to have your cake or eat it.

If you wanted, this would have been a perfectly fine reason to give: "We went with GitHub because it's just what we use mostly, and other stuff not so much."

[skitzmikler]

Who fucking cares? He's having it both ways and you can't stop it? Your tone is offensive. Relax.

[scrollaway]

You're very confused. I don't work with the Archive Team, I was offering my experience regarding our project's move move from Sourceforge to Github and why GGGGGGGGP's (or something...) comment was way off base.

[carussell]

I originally wrote my comment[1] allowing for the idea that you were an uninvolved bystander, until a reread of your comment strongly suggested that you were part of the project being discussed. I suppose I got confused when you began talking about "we" and "our project".

1. The meat of which remains: if it's just an archive and the host is only being used as dumb storage, how is the "community" aspect of it a plus?

[sytse]

No problem, that for your kind comment. And feel free to update your post :)

[scrollaway]

I would, but edits are time-limited on HN.

[sytse]

Ahh, good point, no problem. <3