From: Sean Middleditch <elanthis@...>
Date: 2001-12-04T12:27:53+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:27408] Re: Sourceforge vs. Savannah

On Mon, 2001-12-03 at 21:50, Hal E. Fulton wrote:
> Opinion question(s).
> 
> Is Sourceforge "really OK" for future projects or
> should we go the Savannah route? (savannah.gnu.org)
> 
> If even the most paranoid Rubyists agree that
> Sourceforge is still cool, should we try to create
> a Ruby foundry? I notice there's not one.

I'd say go for it.  SourceForge still performs it's job, quite well.  As
for the paranoid freaks, they might as well disconnect from the
Internet; all their packets are likely somewhere being routed thru a
proprietary router or an NT machine or something.  Their personal data
is being stained by the evilness of proprietary Cisco or Linksys or
Netgear or Microsoft or 3COM software/hardware, any of which could steal
their data, or fail to transport it, or whatever.  They're paying for
the right to use this proprietary service, even, instead of merely
making use of a free service such as SF.  Savannah doesn't even function
half as well as SourceForge does, anyways.  Not to mention someday all
the Ruby stuff might get dumped from Savannah because it's not part of
GNU (talk about SF being evil).

In any event, a Ruby foundry would be great, as it'd be a great place
for a central development/newbie info for Ruby, and allow some tie in
from the project hosted at SF. I'd likely use it, if it's maintained. 
(I was going to use the games foundry as an example, but it appears they
finally updated it recently; and what an update.)  Hell, even if there
are a lot of freaky Ruby developers that dislike SF for whatever reason,
there's still no reason *not* to have a foundry there, is there?

Sean Etc.

> 
> Hal
> 
>