Github != Freedom?
jra at samba.org
Wed Mar 21 18:56:55 UTC 2018
On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 07:48:03AM +1300, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-03-21 at 11:22 -0700, Jeremy Allison wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 06:55:57AM +1300, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
> > >
> > > Or push to github and have travis-ci chew it over (make a pull request
> > > or set it up on the source repo). Andreas did that (made a pull
> > Yes, but that would mean pushing to a proprietary software-as-a-service
> > provider, which is something we're trying to avoid.
> Except for Coverity of course.
No, there is a difference. Coverity and Codenomicon are *extras*.
Nice to have but not an essential part of our workflow.
Github is trying to become an essential part of our workflow.
> > github != Free Software.
> Sure. And to be clear, as someone who actively avoids having Google
> accounts I really do get that.
> > We need to remember that. Yes I know I also work for a proprietary
> > software-as-a-service vendor, but none of our infrastructure *depends*
> > on it. I'm trying to avoid us drifting into that place by accident.
> Will you help build and maintain an alternative? Or at least can you
> commit to using it?
I can't commit to using something I don't know right now, but I
do want the features that we get from github as part of our workflow,
just not depending on github.
github could get bought out/go away/add privacy issues/add service
charges *tomorrow*, and when they do (it's a when, not an if), then
a lot of projects are going to be *screwed*. I don't want to be one
> Ideally I would ask that you use the current GitHub integration, and
> tell me what you like and what doesn't work and where it impinges on
> your freedoms.
> That would give folks like me actively working in this area solid data.
> I wouldn't want to build something 'perfect' and then find that the
> real issue was 'actually, I really just don't like the e-mails' ;-).
> (The irony is that the clunky e-mails exist entirely because we didn't
> want to either split the community nor mandate folks sign in to
> There are alternatives, but also precious as our freedom is our time,
> and time I spend manually compile-testing patches is time I can't spend
> on developing more Free Software.
I understand convenience. I'm as guilty of it as anyone. But
I don't want to *depend* on github such that it's not possible
to build Samba without it.
More information about the samba-technical