I guess he doesn't like bibucket's web interface.
On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 3:44 PM, Micheal Smith <xulfer_AT_cheapbsd.net> wrote:
> I don't have a strong opinion on this either way. The current setup works for me. However bitbucket both offers mercurial, and the suckless namespace is currently free. Might be an easier, and more sensible fit regarding a mirror.
>
> On Jul 3, 2012, at 5:54 AM, Kai Hendry wrote:
>
>> On 3 July 2012 12:47, Nick <suckless-dev_AT_njw.me.uk> wrote:
>>> Is there any point in this other than as a distributed backup?
>>> I worry it may slightly fragment things, with people searching for
>>> dwm and using the github copy, rather than our primary one. Or
>>> sending us github pull requests rather than patches.
>>
>> Well I'm hoping for more, since I quite like the github BTS and UI.
>>
>> Depends on how many of suckless authors I can convince to take an
>> interest. ;) Don't think it would work if I'm some sort of proxy.
>>
>>
>> I think the github UI has some value at least.
>> https://github.com/scklss/dwm/graphs/
>>
>>
>> I'll work on a _AT_daily cronjob that will hopefully keep it synced.
>>
>
>
Received on Tue Jul 03 2012 - 18:38:50 CEST