6 ms·

> by instituting a GitHub based workflow to track patch status, but not everybody uses this. The problem with using GitHub is that you are now at the whims of

> by instituting a GitHub based workflow to track patch status, but not everybody uses this. The problem with using GitHub is that you are now at the whims of the US government[0]. If you have contributors in a sanctioned country they are not cut off from the project and their accounts. By pushing for GitHub you are signalling that you don't want free software, you only want "free for western countries" software The nice thing about emails is that anyone can send an email. There is no third party account sign up needed. > I used to configure mutt to use imap and connect to Gmail directly, but gmail has gone out of their way to make imap as shitty as possible That's the other big problem is that gmail (hotmail too) just sucks for email. Personally I've switched to fastmail and have no issues with imap/isync/offlineimap. --- 0: https://techcrunch.com/2019/07/29/github-ban-sanctioned-countries/ https://techcrunch.com/2019/07/29/github-ban-sanctioned-coun...

bipson 3y ago
GitHub workflow != GitHub Also, I think if you selfhost GitHub (Enterprise) I think your problem disappears also?
rurban 3y ago
git bug uses github only as backend. And optionally. Email workflow just lead to the same unpleasant experiences as with Linux, FreeBSD and similar dinosaurs
- loeg 3y ago
  FreeBSD uses Phabricator and occasionally Github PRs for sharing and discussing patches, not email.
- u801e 3y ago
  I find reviewing code on GitHub unpleasant. A lot of scrolling is required and it's difficult to find previously written comments and their responses. You can't really determine who is responding to whom if more than 2 people are involved. None of those things are problems when reviewing code via email.
mschuster91 3y ago
> If you have contributors in a sanctioned country they are not cut off from the project and their accounts. By pushing for GitHub you are signalling that you don't want free software, you only want "free for western countries" software People affected by this could take up arms and rise against their dictatorships. Pushing them to do so is the entire point of sanctions. In any case, the list of affected countries is pretty small anyway [1]: North Korea, Russia, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and Iran. NK'S population is locked out of anything anyway, nothing to be gained or lost from there, everyone who can has already fled Syria. We can debate if the sanctions on Cuba are worth it or not (and I lean towards the latter option), but Iran, Russia and Venezuela? Whatever needs to be done to push their population must be done, period. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_sanctions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_sanctions
seabass-labrax 3y ago
You don't have to choose one or the other - you could say "please open a GitHub PR if you have an account, otherwise feel free to send an patch to patches@example.com". It might feel a little messy to 'mix and match' PRs and patches like this, but in practice, as long as everyone uses good commit messages I have found it to be inconsequential.
- u801e 3y ago
  Except now you have to look in two different places instead of one.

bipson 3y ago

GitHub workflow != GitHub Also, I think if you selfhost GitHub (Enterprise) I think your problem disappears also?

rurban 3y ago

git bug uses github only as backend. And optionally. Email workflow just lead to the same unpleasant experiences as with Linux, FreeBSD and similar dinosaurs

loeg 3y ago
FreeBSD uses Phabricator and occasionally Github PRs for sharing and discussing patches, not email.
u801e 3y ago
I find reviewing code on GitHub unpleasant. A lot of scrolling is required and it's difficult to find previously written comments and their responses. You can't really determine who is responding to whom if more than 2 people are involved. None of those things are problems when reviewing code via email.

mschuster91 3y ago

> If you have contributors in a sanctioned country they are not cut off from the project and their accounts. By pushing for GitHub you are signalling that you don't want free software, you only want "free for western countries" software People affected by this could take up arms and rise against their dictatorships. Pushing them to do so is the entire point of sanctions. In any case, the list of affected countries is pretty small anyway [1]: North Korea, Russia, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and Iran. NK'S population is locked out of anything anyway, nothing to be gained or lost from there, everyone who can has already fled Syria. We can debate if the sanctions on Cuba are worth it or not (and I lean towards the latter option), but Iran, Russia and Venezuela? Whatever needs to be done to push their population must be done, period. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_sanctions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_sanctions

seabass-labrax 3y ago

You don't have to choose one or the other - you could say "please open a GitHub PR if you have an account, otherwise feel free to send an patch to patches@example.com". It might feel a little messy to 'mix and match' PRs and patches like this, but in practice, as long as everyone uses good commit messages I have found it to be inconsequential.

u801e 3y ago
Except now you have to look in two different places instead of one.