Moving svnbook repository [and tracker [and wiki [and discussion]]] to Google Code
C. Michael Pilato
cmpilato at red-bean.com
Wed Sep 24 12:10:23 CDT 2008
A few weeks ago, Fitz proposed relocating the svnbook source code repository
to Google Code. I don't recall any dissent. But then, I don't recall any
assent, either. :-P
Here's the situation. Today at red-bean.com we have all the tools we need
to run this open source project. We've got the repository, an issue tracker
(Trac), wikis (Trac, MoinMoin), a mailing list (Mailman), etc. Sadly,
though, the tracker and primary wiki are effectively closed to
non-committers (you can't edit without an account, and you can't get an
account without manual administrator intervention). And committership is
still managed by hand edits to htpasswd files and such. Finally,
red-bean.com itself has had some reliability issues over the past few months
that -- while seemingly resolved at the moment -- could crop up again
It's this last point that (I believe) is Fitz's primary concern. It's the
previous ones -- specifically the inaccessibility of the issue tracker and
wiki -- that are mine. A migration to Google Code of the repository, issue
tracking, wiki, etc. is believed to be a solution to all those problems.
Fitz originally indicated that if he didn't hear dissent, he'd undertake
this migration, so technically your chance to speak up has come and gone.
But Fitz is short on time, so he's handed off to me on this. And as this
will affect not just the book authors but all the translation teams as well,
I wanted to make doubly sure that folks were in favor of (or at least
indifferent to) this change.
NOTE: My primary concerns are probably addressable in other ways. I have
to believe that Trac has a better authn/authz subsystem (perhaps in a
third-party module) now than it did in the version we originally deployed.
Of course, that won't alleviate Fitz's primary concerns.
Also, as a secondary matter, there's the question of the mailing list. Do
we continue to use svnbook-dev at red-bean.com, or should we move discussion to
svnbook-dev at googlegroups.com (which the former forwarding mail to the
latter)? I really like the web accessibility of Google Groups, especially
since I'm not a mail hoarder. Finally, I'm betting that we'd get better
spam protection from Google Groups than we have now (which is easy, since we
have none). But do others have a preference?
One final word: I personally hope that a move to Google Code -- and the
easier administration that allows -- will encourage some of the translation
teams who are working elsewhere to consider re-centering their efforts in
the same place that the English work is done. There's no reason why one
issue tracker or Wiki can't carry the artifacts for all the translations.
Additionally, there've been some constructive criticisms leveraged lately
about the repository layout and general processes being disproportionately
English-version-centric -- let's iron those issues out, okay?
C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato at red-bean.com> | http://cmpilato.blogspot.com/
More information about the svn-it