FWIW, I have used github for a collection of OSS projects that I have been
involved in. I think the issue tracker is very robust. It allows for
attachments, robust discussions, tagging and a bunch of other things. If
you go with github, the pace of development might increase as it's easier
for contributors to send you pull requests from their personal fork of the
code (vs the patch trick used today). Pull requests offer an opportunity
for discussion as well, so you can ask the submitter to make corrections
you want before you accept the PR into the code tree. I don't know if the
issue tracker has feature parity with HRM, but my guess it is pretty close.
Thanks
James
On Sun, Nov 8, 2020 at 8:15 AM Marko Lindqvist <cazfi74@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, 6 Nov 2020 at 11:53, graf wasili <graf.wasili@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Well... I didn't quite think this through before sending to the list.
The freeciv source code already lives on github and I guess changing
this is not a question right now.
So yeah why not manage the issues there as well...
Back when gna.org shut down and we were forced to migrate to new
tracker hosting last time, github was evaluated to not to be
sufficient for our heavily ticket-driven and ticket-managed
development process.
This time we may have no better choices available - it was hard to
find even hostedredmine last time. I don't think we can maintain our
own server with current manpower.
Development has slowed down, and is more of single patches than big
patch series to implement major features, so maybe our needs are not
so heavy at the moment.
I have not yet checked how much github trackers have improved.
- ML
