Re: forge.scheme.org or sourcehut.scheme.org Marc Feeley 25 Apr 2021 20:36 UTC
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. >