[ClusterLabs Developers] [RFC] Time to migrate authoritative source forge elsewhere?

[Adam Spiers]

Kristoffer Gronlund <kgronlund at suse.com> wrote:
>Adam Spiers <aspiers at suse.com> writes:
>
>> Kristoffer Gronlund <kgronlund at suse.com> wrote:
>>>>On 07/06/18 08:48 +0200, Kristoffer Grönlund wrote:
>>>>>Jan Pokorný <jpokorny at redhat.com> writes:
>>>So GitLab has a problem that AFAIK even GitHub didn't have, where
>>>certain crucial features are only in the enterprise edition -
>>
>> You're portraying GitLab as worse than GitHub here, but your logic is
>> backwards ;-)  *All* of GitHub's functionality is non-libre, whereas
>> only certain features of GitLab are.
>
>Ah, I wasn't talking about license problems but feature parity.

Ah, I see ;-)

>My glance through the list of features only found in the enterprise edition
>made me think that the open version lacks some features that github
>currently has.

That would be a reasonable guess, but actually I don't think it's
particularly true because GitLab actually has much wider scope than
GitHub.  IIUC GitHub relies heavily on third party integrations for a
lot of the stuff which GitLab is either bundling in CE or EE.

>Regarding licensing, the announcement about enabling additional features
>for open source projects seems to conflate Free as in Libre with free
>as in no one is getting paid, which is a bit concerning...

Indeed.

>Anyway, I'm not *against* GitLab, I'm just not convinced it's worth
>moving to the hosted version due to concerns with the future of GitHub.

Yeah, I suspect a lot of the recent migrations have been just to
demonstrate a point about how people view Microsoft, rather than
driven from any genuine practical concerns.  If they cared that much
about using libre SaaS they wouldn't have been using GitHub in the
first place ...