From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alex Vong Subject: Re: Feedback, ideas, discussion: tracking patches, discussions, bugs. Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2016 22:06:19 +0800 Message-ID: <874m6kbyg4.fsf@gmail.com> References: <57B1AD4D.2080907@goebel-consult.de> <20160815153059.7c8201e6@scratchpost.org> <87h9am5aco.fsf@gmail.com> <57B2BEDA.2020202@goebel-consult.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37088) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bZf0h-0004KE-L4 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Aug 2016 10:06:35 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bZf0c-0001Md-C4 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Aug 2016 10:06:30 -0400 Received: from mail-pa0-x22c.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400e:c03::22c]:34831) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bZf0c-0001MS-4t for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Aug 2016 10:06:26 -0400 Received: by mail-pa0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id i5so26887844pat.2 for ; Tue, 16 Aug 2016 07:06:26 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <57B2BEDA.2020202@goebel-consult.de> (Hartmut Goebel's message of "Tue, 16 Aug 2016 09:20:58 +0200") List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Hartmut Goebel Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Hartmut Goebel writes: > Am 15.08.2016 um 17:18 schrieb Alex Vong: > > Of course, there are other alternatives, such as gogs, > > The gogs.io website is using a lot of external content, namely from > google and jquery. The FAQ is hosted a another external side, discus. > Gogs is not even self-hosting gogs but hosted at github. gogs.io does > not even state which license it has ("Open Source It all at guithub"), > I am a bit confused here, are we going to (1) host the code on our own server, or (2) using code-hosting service provided by other organization? If we are doing (1), then it is up to us to meet the GNU ethical repository criteria [0]. If we are doing (2), then we need to ensure that our service provider meet the criteria [0]. What I suggested is doing (1) with gogs. Do I understand the situation correctly? WDYT? > So there would be at least some work to be done to fulfil the "B" > criteria "Does not report visitors to other organizations" > > (I have to admit that I did not check this for gitlab, though.) [0]: https://www.gnu.org/software/repo-criteria.en.html