Re: [boost] [infrastructure] The vault vs. project hosting vs. Boost hosting?

Subject: Re: [boost] [infrastructure] The vault vs. project hosting vs. Boost hosting?
From: Thomas Heller (thom.heller_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-07-18 02:33:10

On Sunday, July 17, 2011 02:16:09 PM Rene Rivera wrote:
> On 7/17/2011 1:55 PM, Dave Abrahams wrote:
> > on Sun Jul 17 2011, Edward Diener<eldiener-AT-tropicsoft.com>  wrote:
> >> On 7/16/2011 11:22 PM, Rene Rivera wrote:
> >> snipped...
> >> 
> >>> If we abandon the vault we also have to make the choices as to
> >>> whether
> >>> to abandon the current sandbox also. The reasons we've had two
> >>> different systems until now is that the sandbox provides the
> >>> revision control that some prospective projects want (when they
> >>> don't want to use some other project hosting). This aspect doesn't
> >>> seem to me as important anymore as there are varied project hosting
> >>> services available. Which wasn't the case when the sandbox started.
> >>> So to me it seems to make sense to also abandon the sandbox in
> >>> favor of a combined solution.
> >> 
> >> Boost should provide some sort of version control hosting for
> >> potential Boost libraries. The sandbox has served that situation well
> >> and makes it easy for library developers to test their library against
> >> a Boost release/tree, such as the Boost trunk. Abandoning the sandbox
> >> does not seem reasonable to me unless there is a better version
> >> control hosting solution.
> > 
> > GitHub is better.  Google Code is better.  BitBucket is better.
> > Indefero is better.  Shall I go on? ;-)
> 
> Hm.. Perhaps you should. Since I wasn't aware of some of those ;-) Goes
> to show how far project hosting has progressed... Far enough to loose
> track of what's available!

The best thing about these hosting services is that they publish their 
software as open source. github and gitorious provide free access to their 
software running the service (I don't know of the others) ....

> > My point is, there's no reason for Boost to spend its resources or
> > attention on this; there are plenty of professionally-run services
> > giving it away for free.
> 
> Right; but there is one thing that the current sandbox provides.. Boost
> topical locality. All the code in there is specifically for Boost in
> some form. And hence it's a bit easier for visitors to find new things
> in it. Which is what was brought up in other posts.. Of trying to not do
> our own central hosting, yet keep a nice central "index" / "catalog"
> location.

... How about getting the software and host a boost like 
github/svnhub/mercurialhub whatever (provided we have the necessary 
ressources)?