On Monday, 1 September 2014 at 22:52:46 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 8/30/2014 7:37 AM, Dicebot wrote:
>> GitHub is an intrusive closed ecosystem and it is legitimate
>> concern for anyone caring about the open internet.
>
> How so? The github repositories are mirrored on my machine as git repositories.

git != GitHub

While you may still clone the repository there is no way to use any of advanced / social features without creating GitHub account and those features are exactly why it gets used. With no support for anonymous / openID input it creates situation where you have to chose - go with competitors and lose notable amount of community attention or stay with GitHub even if actual technological features provided are sub-par. In the end it encourages harmful attitude "there is nothing outside the GitHub" which of course benefits its owners much more than any actual technological advantage.

It is nothing unique for GitHUb I can blame them for though - this is how absolute majority of web services is built these days and I don't see it changing without any government regulations. Does mean I must like it.

On 9/2/2014 12:11 AM, Tourist wrote:
> On Saturday, 30 August 2014 at 10:57:51 UTC, ketmar via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> Hello.
>>
>> there are some c-style array declarations both in druntime and in
>> phobos. i made two patches that fixes 'em:
>>
>> https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13401
>> https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13402
>
> Don't want to register on GitHub?
> Just use those:
> Username: d-random-contributor
> Password: d-random-contributor-password

For significant patches to D, we'll need more than an anonymous account, in case there's any legal question about where the code came from.

This is not necessary for submitting bug reports or participating in discussions and reviews.

On 30/08/14 16:37, Dicebot wrote:

> No it is not. GitHub is an intrusive closed ecosystem and it is
> legitimate concern for anyone caring about the open internet.

There are alternatives. Gitlab for example. It's open source but it has commercial interests as well. It's the best alternative I've seen to Gitlab, we use it at work, self hosted. Although Github is slightly better.

Note, I'm not advocating for a change.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

On Saturday, 30 August 2014 at 14:37:29 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
> On Saturday, 30 August 2014 at 14:32:01 UTC, Daniel Murphy wrote:
>> "Dicebot"  wrote in message news:xovsaqnanmmgaltipuhz@forum.dlang.org...
>>
>>> It is not hard, it is plain unacceptable for certain people. Call that religious reasons.
>>
>> Using github is similar to our requirement to match the code style when submitting patches.  It's non-negotiable, because there's no good reason not to do it.  You just remove those tabs, then get on with it.
>
> No it is not. GitHub is an intrusive closed ecosystem and it is legitimate concern for anyone caring about the open internet. The fact that I have considered D contribution more important than this concern and the fact that you consider such reasoning silly does not make it less legit and/or widespread. If you don't want these contributions - just ignore it, someone else will take care. But please avoid this pseudo-pragmatical "non-negotiable" bullshit, at least in public.

It's easy to install a gogs server and upload all the git
repositories there.

In fact, I do have a gogs server for my private development. It
used to be a GitLab server, until I found about gogs.

GitLab looks and feels like GitHub, just with your own URL. Gogs
has less features (lacks groups and pull requests), but it uses
fewer resources.

Therefore it is possible to get all the technical benefits of
GitHub and none of the political concerns.

On Tuesday, 2 September 2014 at 19:23:18 UTC, Poyeyo wrote:
> ...and none of the political concerns.

Gogs
A self-hosted Git service written in Go

http://gogs.io/

On 30/08/2014 16:27, Joseph Rushton Wakeling via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> It's a shame that your dislike of github is stronger than your desire to
>> contribute code.
>
> I'm sorry, that won't wash.  It's a given, especially now, that for some
> people, using these large-scale online social networks is a no-no.

What?? Since when is GitHub an online social network? That's ridiculous..

-- 
Bruno Medeiros
https://twitter.com/brunodomedeiros

On 30/08/2014 15:37, Daniel Murphy wrote:
> "Ola Fosheim Grøstad" " wrote in message
> news:pmrjlrkkaaiguefnqypr@forum.dlang.org...
>
>> Here is a good reason: «I have no interest in learning github, and I
>> personally don't care if you accept this patch, but here you have it
>> in case you want to improve your system».
>>
>> Here is another good reason: «Figuring out the D process is waaaay
>> down on my todo list, maybe sometime next month, next year, next…»
>
> If it takes longer to work out how to submit a pull request than make
> your patch, your patch probably wasn't worth doing.

True, but only if you count the time it took to "make your patch" as *all* the time of the underlying task (investigating the problem, debugging, considering possible solutions, coding a fix, verifying the fix, etc.).

-- 
Bruno Medeiros
https://twitter.com/brunodomedeiros

On 30/08/2014 15:37, Dicebot wrote:
> No it is not. GitHub is an intrusive closed ecosystem and it is
> legitimate concern for anyone caring about the open internet. The fact
> that I have considered D contribution more important than this concern
> and the fact that you consider such reasoning silly does not make it
> less legit and/or widespread. If you don't want these contributions -
> just ignore it, someone else will take care. But please avoid this
> pseudo-pragmatical "non-negotiable" bullshit, at least in public

I'd much rather use a closed ecosystem that is better featured, than an open one which is sub-par (especially if the data is easily available and thus in the future I could easily migrate to another system from the closed one, if desired).

But I understand that if one is a Free Software advocate, then one would have ethical objections against using a closed ecosystem, no matter what.

-- 
Bruno Medeiros
https://twitter.com/brunodomedeiros

On 02/09/2014 08:20, Dicebot wrote:
>
> While you may still clone the repository there is no way to use any of
> advanced / social features without creating GitHub account and those
> features are exactly why it gets used. With no support for anonymous /
> openID input it creates situation where you have to chose - go with
> competitors and lose notable amount of community attention or stay with
> GitHub even if actual technological features provided are sub-par. In
> the end it encourages harmful attitude "there is nothing outside the
> GitHub" which of course benefits its owners much more than any actual
> technological advantage

GitHub features are sub-par?... To what, Bugzilla?? You must be kidding me, Github is way better...

-- 
Bruno Medeiros
https://twitter.com/brunodomedeiros

On Wed, 03 Sep 2014 15:05:31 +0100
Bruno Medeiros via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:

> What?? Since when is GitHub an online social network? That's ridiculous..
if it looks like a duck...

it is.