[VOTE] Use GitHub issues instead of bugs.openwrt.org

[Rich Brown]

I have already cast my vote (to switch to Github), but I'd like to make an analogy:

We all realize that we have to stop driving cars, long term, for the health of the planet. But even as we continue to make our personal efforts to decrease, we still purchase from BigAuto(tm) and BigOil(tm) because we have lives to live, work to perform, etc. Most of us have chosen not to change our livelihoods to focus on decreasing energy use.

Here's how I see our choice: We could...

- divert energies of the OpenWrt core team to move to/develop an open-source solution, AND find the team members to maintain it long-term 
-OR- 
- adopt a well-known, well-supported commercial package that does (most of) what we need today, even it might (in the future) do something we don't like

I would opt to go with Github today. At some point in the future, things might "go south" so that we want to move away from Github. That's the time to divert developer efforts toward moving Git repos and bug reports and everything.

In the meantime, we can be productive using the (very good) tools on Github. Thanks for listening.

Rich

> On Jan 27, 2022, at 5:15 AM, Paul Oranje <por at oranjevos.nl> wrote:
> 
> Op 25 jan. 2022, om 15:20 heeft Paul Spooren <mail at aparcar.org> het volgende geschreven:
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> An observation of a by-stander about this vote and the prior discussion.
>>> 
>>> Most, if not all of the pro GitHub arguments and votes cast seem to be for good pragmatic reasons, which is fair enough and understandable.
>>> On the other hand, most of votes and objections have a more principal point of few.
>>> 
>>> And the difficulty about principles is that these are ... principles, that these are in some way fundamental (not necessarily absolute, but ...).
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Besides: A decision that surpasses on some principle might benefit from an explicit acknowledgement of that involved principle. The accompanying discussion has served that purpose, but it could be good practice to state the involved principles raised in the discussions in a preambule of an ensuing vote.
>>> 
>>> I'm aware that a solution for current problems with FS (and git hosting) is surely needed and that by-standers do not carry the burden of solving the problems and shall so respect the outcome.
>> 
>> I’m not sure if I understand what you’re trying to say. Could you please rephrase this?
> 
> Rephrased:
> 
> Most arguments against going GitHub are about it being in control of a private company that likely puts its own interests (to be more precise: its shareholders) before that of other stakeholders, see f.e. groklaw.net, a legal trove that documents (earlier) practices and conduct of such companies. Considerations like these touch on principles, in this case principles of FOSS.
> 
> That doesn't imply one could not decide to go GitHub, but principles are of another nature then technical arguments (i.e. practical).
> Both are relevant, but in general, surpassing a principle is more difficult to defend, requires pressing reasons and remedies.
> 
> The above "Besides:" remark stated that if a vote touches on a principle (as shown by its preceding discussion), the voting ballot would better mention that.
> 
> Best regards,
> Paul
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> openwrt-adm mailing list
> openwrt-adm at lists.openwrt.org
> https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-adm