Is dsource .org completely deserted?

[Joseph Rushton Wakeling]

On 15/05/12 04:16, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> I firmly believe that GitHub/BitBucket/etc-style features need to be
> standard *protocols*, not features bundled inseparably to project hosting.
> What the hell is this, 1980 all over again where data is routinely tied
> inseparably to the software it originated from?

Whatever your opinion of GitHub etc. (and I agree that it makes sense for there 
to be a well-defined set of interaction protocols), the key point is surely that 
dedicated code-hosting and collaboration platforms can provide a much better 
service than individual projects' self-hosted repositories.

Where dsource.org is concerned probably the best thing to do is make it a 
carefully-maintained directory of active projects, without hosting, issue 
tracking, etc. included (of course, existing repos should be kept in place to 
avoid data loss).  It's unlikely to be much pain for the projects, who can be 
given plenty of notice to migrate.

As it stands it makes D look quite dead and derelict, when that's not the case 
at all.