RFC: Sourcehut migration #155

Closed Semisol closed 3 years ago

This post is only advisory on the decision to migrate.

As discussed in #51, there has been thoughts about migrating to Sourcehut. I would like to request opinion from the community.

Please respond to this issue with the following comment format:

I am in favor of option 1/2/3/4/5.

<insert reason>

Options for migration:

Full We abandon GitHub and move to Sourcehut
Sourcehut primary, GitHub secondary We will accept PRs and issues from GitHub, but mainly Sourcehut will be used. GH will be a mirror.
None We will stay on GitHub and Sourcehut will not be used except for mailing lists and other misc stuff.
GitHub primary, Sourcehut secondary We still continue to work as normal on GitHub, but Sourcehut can be contributed to. Sourcehut will still be primary on mailing lists and other features GH doesn't have.
Something else This option is for if you only want to move to another forge, partially or fully.

We recommend you read all the comments before responding.

I am in favor of option 5. Specifically, moving to Gitlab and mirroring code only to Github.

As some have mentioned above, Sourcehut is only in alpha state, which makes it a risky choice for a larger long-term project. More importantly, it's not particularly user friendly and could potentially discourage people from contributing.

We can learn from GNOME's, Freedesktop.org's and KDE's migrations here. I don't know about the others, but GNOME migrated because their previous stack was not very contributor friendly and was also getting harder to maintain. Sure enough, once they migrated, they saw a rise in contributions — showing that the user-friendliness of a platform really does matter.

Anyway, if Sourcehut is chosen, I'd be in favor of having a window (3 months?) where Github would still be primary and Sourcehut secondary. That way, developers could test out Sourcehut and see if it really meets their needs.

please Vote and not only Reason

I am in favor of option 1/2/3/4/5. \

and any can have his reason, but it must justified if like, thump's up or not it's no matter and can f... the same imho, so please, give a clean VOTE at me is 5th or 2 and read the ..beep.. Topic on top if you are write something ... Gitlab and Sourcehut at me, but this have i already say's more top why.. in short: Independent of MS (Github belongs MS) and the States ...

(that comes out when you hide something) ( i want not directly goes offtopic, with a new post, but @Be-ing , hey DJ, Gitlab supports the most systems, include WinNT and Sourcehat too so far i am know.. so, imho must first goes independents and support Linuxbin's then thinking about WinNT and Mac is a Linuxsystem with own restricted driver in short, so.. what about "cross compiling" and if need it's able to use external compiling engins DJ.. i know you have wrote Mixxx ... )

It is too early to vote on this. We have work to do exploring technical options, namely cross compiling.

@Be-ing As stated previously, this is an advisory that will be taken into consideration for the final vote. Anyways, 2 more contributors before the final vote is taken and I do the tally! I am voting for option 4.

It is too early to vote on this. We have work to do exploring technical options, namely cross compiling.

But If we wait longer, the migration would getting harder and harder.

Also, we don't have enough normal users and potential developers in the voting. Most of the people voting for 1/2/5 have moved away from GitHub, and lots of them say so on their GH profiles. 😕

If the opinon of users were requested too, I want to express mine. If not, you can dismiss my vote.

I'm in favour of (3), remaining on Github. Reasons are as follows:

Sourcehut is a paid-for platform (tho currently it's free in its alpha IIUC). There's an exception for those who use it only to contribute but that might change and/or be confusing to newcomers.
Sourcehut is run mostly by a single person. If a non-mainstream code forge is to be used, I feel like it's more appropriate to opt for a platform that is collectively community owned.

As for (5), I think there's not much that GH offers that GL doesn't. But IMHO postponing a move until after the fork is in some OS repos, a new website is made, and some traction is gained is wiser. As @Be-ing says, GH shouldn't have a monopoly on hosting FOSS, but I don't think there's harm in taking advantage of the existing contribution routes that the wider community is used to while the fork establishes itself.

Anyways, my 2c. Thank you so much for your perseverance on maintaining this fork and doing the right thing, despite a bunch of sad stuff we had to put up with.

I would do it in this way, if debating about whether or not move to sourcehut. Keep in mind, that you can host sourcehut software yourself. However, for performance and ease-of-use reasons, I much prefer gogs as a self-hosted product.

But If we wait longer, the migration would getting harder and harder.

I agree that we shouldn't wait for some arbitrary time to switch. I think we should switch when we have a solution figured out for macOS and Windows builds.

I agree that we shouldn't wait for some arbitrary time to switch. I think we should switch when we have a solution figured out for macOS and Windows builds.

I think you can build at least Windows binaries in docker containers.

That does not help:

Windows requires the host OS version to match the container OS version.

I would do it in this way, if debating about whether or not move to sourcehut.

That would option 1.

Keep in mind, that you can host sourcehut software yourself.

Of course, but there is not a big reason. SourceHut doesn't require a account, all contributors can contribute with only having a email address. It is maybe a bit much for "just" a audacity fork, sr.ht already has it's servers.

However, for performance and ease-of-use reasons, I much prefer gogs as a self-hosted product.

Gogs (and also the fork, gitea) require a account for contributors if they want to submit a patch.

If the opinon of users were requested too, I want to express mine. If not, you can dismiss my vote.

The team would, i guess, allow everyone to vote. Users, Developers, and so on, everybody is welcome as it's a free and open source community-driven project.

I have started tallying. The issue will be locked to collaborators until the results are out.

Please note that only clear (I am in favor of x (optional: then y, z)) choices will be included in the tally.

Using instant runoff voting (like previously done in the name private vote), the winner is:

Sourcehut primary, Github secondary.

Ballot data

BLT file

5 1
1 2 4 - 0
1 2 - - 0
1 3 - - 0
1 2 1 4 0
1 2 4 - 0
1 2 5 1 0
1 4 - - 0
1 4 2 - 0
1 3 - - 0
1 5 - - 0
1 1=2 - - 0
1 1=5 - - 0
1 4 - - 0
1 5 - - 0
1 4 - - 0
1 2 1 - 0
1 5 - - 0
1 4 - - 0
1 1 2 - 0
1 2 - - 0
1 2 - - 0
1 2 4 5 0
1 3=4 - - 0
1 1=5 - - 0
1 2 - - 0
1 4 3 - 0
1 3 - - 0
1 5 4 - 0
1 4 - - 0
1 5 - - 0
1 5 - - 0
1 4 2 - 0
1 5 - - 0
1 4 - - 0
1 3 - - 0
1 2 - - 0
0
"Sourcehut"
"Sourcehut primary Github secondary"
"Github"
"Github primary Sourcehut secondary"
"Other"
"Vote for forge selection"

The raw ballots:

2 4 -
2 - -
3 - -
2 1 4
2 4 -
2 5 1
4 - -
4 2 -
3 - -
5 - -
1=2 - -
1=5 - -
4 - -
5 - -
4 - -
2 1 -
5 - -
4 - -
1 2 -
2 - -
2 - -
2 4 5
3=4 - -
1=5 - -
2 - -
4 3 -
3 - -
5 4 -
4 - -
5 - -
5 - -
4 2 -
5 - -
4 - -
3 - -
2 - -

(- = unspecified, `a=b` means both were selected)

OpenSTV logs:

OpenSTV version 1.7 (http://www.OpenSTV.org/)

Suggested donation for using OpenSTV for an election is $50.  Please go to
http://www.OpenSTV.org/donate to donate via PayPal, Google Checkout, or
Amazon Payments.

Certified election reports are also available.  Please go to
http://www.openstv.org/certified-reports for more information.

Loading ballots from file test.blt.
Ballot file contains 5 candidates and 36 ballots.
No candidates have withdrawn.
Ballot file contains 32 non-empty ballots.

Counting votes for Vote for forge selection using Instant Runoff Voting.
5 candidates running for 1 seat.

 R|Sourcehut  |Sourcehut p|Github     |Github prim|Other      |Exhausted
  |           |rimary Gith|           |ary Sourceh|           |
  |           |ub secondar|           |ut secondar|           |
  |           |y          |           |y          |           |
==========================================================================
 1|          1|         11|          4|          9|          7|          0
  |-----------------------------------------------------------------------
  | Count of first choices.
==========================================================================
 2|           |         12|          4|          9|          7|          0
  |-----------------------------------------------------------------------
  | Count after eliminating Sourcehut and transferring votes.
==========================================================================
 3|           |         12|           |          9|          7|          4
  |-----------------------------------------------------------------------
  | Count after eliminating Github and transferring votes.
==========================================================================
 4|           |         12|           |         10|           |         10
  |-----------------------------------------------------------------------
  | Count after eliminating Other and transferring votes. Candidate
  | Sourcehut primary Github secondary is elected.

Winner is Sourcehut primary Github secondary.

@Semisol why did you use propietary software for this?

For example, I suggested https://poll.disroot.org specifically to avoid this...

Ah okay, that was the last FLOSS version. I read.

Sorry.

Ah okay, that was the last FLOSS version. I read.

Sorry.

I don't want to use the web OpaVote again after trying it (no source code annoys me too).

I have locked the conversation to freeze the votes. Thanks for participating, if there are any concerns send an e-mail to the ~tenacity/tenacity-discuss@lists.sr.ht mailing list or open a discussion.

tenacityteam / tenacity-legacy

RFC: Sourcehut migration #155

This post is only advisory on the decision to migrate.

Sourcehut primary, Github secondary.