Is dsource .org completely deserted?

H. S. Teoh hsteoh at quickfur.ath.cx
Thu May 17 15:03:31 PDT 2012


On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 04:51:04PM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
[...]
> Have you ever heard of, or even read, "Hugi Magazine"? (
> http://www.hugi.scene.org/main.php?page=hugi  ). It has interesting
> content, but the format is absolutely moronic: Instead of coming in
> PDF or HTML or even DOC or dead-tree, it comes in *EXE* form. That's
> right. So you can't use your choice of viewer, and you can't even read
> it on another device without them actually *porting* the fucking
> issue.
> 
> GitHub/BitBucket/etc (along with 90% of "Web 2.0" and "cloud"), are
> very, very much like Hugi. And yet somehow, people seem to think it's
> a fantastic *advancement*. Bleh.
[...]

Is it really _that_ bad? GitHub does support directly running git
pull/push, clone, etc. just by specifying the URL.  If you want to send
somebody a pull request, you could just put your repo on any git hosting
service (or run your own), and email the relevant people the URL to your
repo. Then they can just run git pull $url and that's that.

Though you do have a point that a standard protocol for pull requests,
issue tracking, etc., would be nice. If git was extended to have, say,
discussion tracking for pull requests, then people can actually discuss
your requests in a hosting-independent way, and you can, e.g., run 'git
pull discuss --client=mutt' to read discussions via Mutt or whatever
your favorite non-dumb mail/news reader is. But this is more a
limitation of the current git protocol than the fault of any of the
present hosting systems. You could, y'know, send pull requests to the
upstream git source to rectify this situation... ;-)


T

-- 
Creativity is not an excuse for sloppiness.


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list