moving to SourceForge

[Jagannathan, Suresh]

FWIW: we considered Sourceforge here and after trying to setup a =
reasonable
environment for about 3 weeks gave up.  Erice Beuscher who is a fairly=20
competent Unix hacker told me that there were too many undocumented =
features
that made it impossible to use.  I think it was especially hard to use =
for
remote development.  We stuck with CVS.  Of course, VA Linux has a =
number of
different schemes and installation choices so the one we were looking at =
may
have been quite different than what you're thinking of, but the end =
analysis
was pretty negative.  I'll try to dig up more details if you're =
interested.

-- Suresh

-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Weeks [mailto:sweeks@acm.org]
Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 2:53 AM
To: MLton@sourcelight.com
Subject: Re: moving to SourceForge



Henry writes:
> I think that moving it to Sourceforge is a big big mistake.  Who knows =
what
> there long-term future is given that VA is doing rather badly =
financially
> and that they also sell the sourceforge software, which means that =
they
> might not concentrate on improving their free version.

SourceForge has over 30,000 projects and almost 400,000 users.  I
don't think it's going away soon.

The software already does what we want, so improvements aren't that
essential.  But, I think that improvements are likely to continue
anyways with so many people using the software.

And even if SourceForge goes away (and this is a huge if), do you
really think we would lose anything?  SourceForge makes nightly
tarballs of our CVS directory available for download for backup
purposes, which we will certainly do.

I wouldn't mind redirecting the wed site from mlton.org so we have
longer term url stability, but that would be nice for MLton wherever
it lives.

Most importantly, SourceForge gives us stuff that I think would be
helpful in developing and promoting MLton, with minimal effort on our
part.

I still haven't seen anything that convinces me it's even a slightly
bad idea.