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

Subject: Re: [boost] [infrastructure] The vault vs. project hosting vs. Boost hosting?
From: Rene Rivera (grafikrobot_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-07-18 21:34:55

On 7/18/2011 8:24 PM, Dave Abrahams wrote:
>
> on Mon Jul 18 2011, Thomas Heller<thom.heller-AT-googlemail.com>  wrote:
>
>> On Sunday, July 17, 2011 03:05:40 PM Rene Rivera wrote:
>>> On 7/17/2011 11:48 AM, Dave Abrahams wrote:
>>>> on Sat Jul 16 2011, Rene Rivera<grafikrobot-AT-gmail.com>   wrote:
>>>> The priority should be on convenience for reviewers rather than for
>>>> submitters, as there are hopefully many more of the former than the
>>>> latter.  As a reviewer, I really want to be able to review all of the
>>>> code and documentation on the web.  I'd also like the source to be
>>>> presented in a SCM repository to ease integration of review commentary,
>>>> etc.  For me, this all points toward using a public repo hosting
>>>> service like GitHub.
>>>
>>> +1; In a dream world there would be a project hosting service that would
>>> allow many types of SCM clients to get the code regardless of what the
>>> author used to put the code in with.
>>
>> FWIW, github lets you checkout and commit through svn:
>> https://github.com/blog/626-announcing-svn-support
>> and
>> https://github.com/blog/644-subversion-write-support
>
> Oh, yeah, I forgot about that!  That alone is enough to make me
> comfortable with GitHub as a solution.

Except that wasn't it mentioned some time ago that even though Github 
says it's "beta".. It's actually more like "alpha" ?

-- 
-- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything
-- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com
-- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafik/redshift-software.com
-- 102708583/icq - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail