We will be moving to GitHub

[Michael Torrie]

On 01/01/2016 11:43 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Jan 2016 07:09 am, Chris Angelico wrote:
> 
>> Yes, git is a capable tool. But so is Mercurial, and the arguments
>> weren't primarily based on differences in functionality (which are
>> pretty minor). It's mainly about the network effect.
> 
> You call it the network effect. I call it monoculture.

Indeed. The whole purpose of git is to allow development to be
distributed.  Is it a matter of hosting space?  Is it too expensive for
python.org to host their own public-facing git repository?  Especially
if python.org has no plans to use github's issue tracker this move makes
little sense to me.  A pull request can be made from any developer's own
git repository without github, or even from github if other developers
really want to work there.

I can understand why OSS projects like github given its complete
project-management options.  But if it's just the repository you're
after, I get far more mileage from my own locally-hosted git
repositories.  It's not at all hard to push to a read-only public http
git repository.  Pull requests can be made against individual
developers' http repos or hosted git providers.