I think another pro for sourcehut is that it is small/minimal, which is something I appreciate.  However, if this source code hosting service on scheme.org is meant to be used for hosting portable Scheme code and libraries, then we should make sure it is something library users/authors will be comfortable using.

One reason why I like the idea of a source code hosting service on scheme.org is that it would allow a simple integration with try.scheme.org (by avoiding CORS related issues).  However, this would imply that all code hosted there is “trusted”.  Will there be a mechanism to control account creation and what will be required to be “approved”?

Marc

> On Apr 25, 2021, at 3:59 PM, Amirouche <xxxxxx@hyper.dev> wrote:
>
> On 2021-04-25 21:43, Marc Feeley wrote:
>> How does sourcehut compare to gitlab (which would be another option)?
>> Marc
>
> Sourcehut, pros:
>
> - Use Python
> - Simple UI/UX
> - Mailing list support
> - Build support
>
> Sourcehut, cons:
>
> - No social features except the ML (no stars, no watch, no fork button)
> - No review UI except ML
> - It also rely Go
>
> gitlab, pros:
>
> - social features
> - review UI
>
> gitlab cons:
>
> - Use mostly ruby, and I have zero ruby experience, and everybody told me it is pain to host.
>
> I have not a lot of experience with gitlab, I find their GUI too confusing.
>