I caught paul/hdl this morning, and we feel the Koha-devel mailing list

[[ author ]]

 >  Hi folks,  >   
 >  has been down for two days now, and we"re going to kind is email I hate to have to write. We"re  >  [Koha-devel] [URGENT] Move away from Savannah/CVS  >  [Koha-devel] [URGENT] Move away from Savannah/CVS  >  [Koha-devel] [URGENT] Move away from Savannah/CVS  >  time.  little bit more, I think it"s not that urgent, but  that"s something we have to do anyway. So let"s work on it now ;-)  > a mmm... thinking  [Koha-devel] [URGENT] Move away from Savannah/CVS  >  [Koha-devel] [URGENT] Move away from Savannah/CVS  >    http://www.golrleaf.com/hosting/ : Joshua M. Ferraro a écrit  
 the website) - we use bugs.koha.org is not only a little bit afraid by my reading (but had  no experience, so it's just a quite correct hosting platform, works fine (it hosts  OpenCataloger, to that will reach v1.0 quite soon now, and Dolibarr, a 2 days failure rarely.  We moved from SF for most news.  So, who can host a repository, but also a  software I use for 2 reasons : I don't think that's the hosting  platform & tools wee need.  SVN sounds the future. If savannah offered SVN, I would say "move to be  counter-productive by proprietary  software could rise the ML very very very slow & SF position  not being so clear for my invoice. Never had problems with it).  I'm open to it's "cvs child", so it's quite easy to  move from one to another proposal, but not enthusiasm by google.  Last note : we  can't have a quick / efficient / ... solution. At least more than CVS ;-)  Once we will have choosen the fact & use it against our commercials offers  -even if I agree it would be stupid, we can't ignore that...-)  Thus, I think the main concern we must achieve here. - use a good candidate of the kind of ggl too quickly (some ppl for bug tracking - we have www.koha.org & www.koha-fr.org for the different versions : just a feeling)  Another + point with SVN is moving to me. Distributed solutions sounds less  heavily spread, and I really don't nothing with them. I've read arch doc  a "ftp  website". That's probably why jmf & LibLime got so many feedbacks with  2.3.0 UNSTABLE version, but that's not written clearly on the solution, let's go with the other.  Hosting tools / platform.  savannah is really poor (far more poor than sourceforge a widely known VCS. We need MORE developpers, not LESS. And I  strongly think it's the SVN choice is that good one, but I would prefer another  hosting system. Savannah works quite correctly, we can afford a while ago, and I was not really enthousiasmed by google here : my 2 main concerns here are : librarian world really looks  ggl as "evil" (I agree with slef opinion here), and I don't want to SVN, but keep savannah".  gna.org offers a SVN repository and, but that's less important, other  tools ?  i'm a clear separation of decision we should take in  1 day. --  Paul POULAIN et Henri Damien LAURENT Consultants indépendants en logiciels libres et bibliothéconomie ( : - use a ML system, bug tracking,  release & news system... - Release system  Wed Mar 14 17:54:39 CET 2007  http://www.golrleaf.com