prmadev
commented
9 months ago To be honest, one of the main attractions of pimalaya project was that it was, mostly, hosted on sourcehut. True, sourcehut used a workflow that is unfamiliar to most developers. But the workflow is mostly the one that git is made for, exceptionally decentralized and has much less friction, once you learn it. Also your progress is not bound to a particulat provider. When sr.ht is down, I still have my email's mailbox.
Of course there are always instability problems when working with smaller services. And a nasty one of them is vulnerability to huge and advanced attacks like a layer 3 DDoS attack. But is also the benefit that thr smaller service has to be more customer oriented than the default option.
Now, if we consider things like codeberg and gitlab, yes, the move suggests that the contributers should sign up for the new service, which is probably not something that most people are willing to do. But to contribute to a repo hosted on sr.ht, a contributer should only be willing to send an email to some address, using built-in commands of git. And even when sr.ht email services where down, you could send email to those addresses, they just get delivered when the service is up. For example, see this patch that I sent when the whole of sourcehut was down: https://lists.sr.ht/~soywod/pimalaya/patches/48533 It still managed to reach the intended endpoint, when ever. So these attacks don't hurt as much as it might for other source forges. Another benefit is that while github is leaving accessibility behind everyday, sourcehut is pushing extremely hard on the boundries of html only. You might not care about this one but Microsoft and the enshitifications that follows it, is not a good news either, nor is them doubling down on AI instead of advancing the git workflow itself.
And to be honest for a product centered around emails on the command line, an email centric workflow that git is more equipt to handle makes much more sense to me. So to me, as a new contributer, I felt much more welcome using sourcehut; Even though I regularly have to use github and gitlab for my work.
But hey, I was already sold on sourcehut. And I'm pretty new to project. So what do I know? 😊
polarathene
soywod
It might be good to have a pinned issue, or one that the README / issue template below points to regarding the motivation to move away from Github to SourceHut? Will the Github repo here lock issues and archive? Or will it still actively mirror the SourceHut repo?
I'm additionally raising an issue about the docs site being down (
pimalaya.org), something that wouldn't be an issue if they were hosted via Github Pages?I'm not familiar with SourceHut, nor do I have any motivation to create an account there presently, hopefully it's worthwhile for you. I've seen similar migrations to GitLab before, but as a user that was not something I could actively participate in as a basic feature for viewing / tracking notifications across projects had been a known issue and unresolved for years (possibly still the case), you'd only have email notifications available.
EDIT: Just looked at the new home (and the recent DDoS issues blogged about from this service in Jan 2023), and I am having a difficult time understanding why you're ditching Github for it. I definitely think it'll add friction towards users contributing PRs and participating / reporting issues 🤷♂️ (and perhaps discovery somewhat, I came across the project from Github Topics)
Original issue template discouraging opening issues on GH
Himalaya is slowly migrating away from GitHub. The new bug tracker is now on [sourcehut](https://sr.ht/). You can submit an issue either by: * Sending an email at [~soywod/pimalaya@todo.sr.ht](mailto:~soywod/pimalaya@todo.sr.ht) (it is the simplest since you do not need to create any account) * Submitting [this form](https://todo.sr.ht/~soywod/pimalaya) (you need a free sourcehut account)