Setting up a git service + issue tracking for the project

[sphinxc0re]

I discussed this topic earlier with tycho on IRC:

Code:

<SphinxC0re> Since the project is getting bigger and bigger, the single point of failure would be, that Github might drop us. What about our own project git service (git.cuberite.org) ?
<tycho_> That would be pretty big event. I don't think github has ever droped a public repo.
<SphinxC0re> Oh it has
<tycho_> When?
<SphinxC0re> happens all the time
<tycho_> Can you give an example?
<SphinxC0re> Windows 2000, Spigot
<SphinxC0re> try googeling it
<tycho_> Both DCMA, and we have good comebacks.
<tycho_> If microsoft want to actually sue us it would be interesting.
<SphinxC0re> As long as we are not paying for our service on Github, we are in danger of getting dropped
<tycho_> And we have backups of the repo.
<SphinxC0re> All the big OSS projects have own git services
<SphinxC0re> what about issues
<SphinxC0re> prs
<SphinxC0re> all dropped
<rincewind> In theory I could host it, but I couldn't garanty the reliability of the service
<tycho_> PR's would be minor, we'd lose history thats all.
<rincewind> s/couldn't/can't/
<tycho_> issues would be ennoying, but our own git hosting isn't going to solve that, as none of the git hosting solutions handle that.
<SphinxC0re> Gitlab does
<rincewind> But I would happily mirror it for backup
<SphinxC0re> Every develloper is 'mirroring' the repo all the time
<tycho_> Then thats not just git hosting.
<SphinxC0re> that's correct
<tycho_> But if we're going to host it ourselves we might as well use something dedecated to bug tracking.
<SphinxC0re> Why should we split it into two services?
<SphinxC0re> Gitlab is pretty good
<tycho_> Because something that is dedecated to bug tracking is going to focus more on handling bug tracking.
<SphinxC0re> Okay
<SphinxC0re> But we could use Gitlab dedicated to the sourcecode (user access, PRs, etc) and another service like mantis for bt
<tycho_> The project used to use an flyspray instance.
<SphinxC0re> So what do you think?
<tycho_> I think you're overblowing the issue.
<tycho_> The main reason a lot of the big projects don't use github is they predate it.
<SphinxC0re> What does that mean practically?
<tycho_> If you can get an export and host sorted out than it might be considered, but for the moment we're happy with github.
<tycho_> Thats what bearbin did when we migrated to github.
<SphinxC0re> Gitlab can import from Github directly
<tycho_> What about a host?
<tycho_> The thing is that every tae down so far has been DCMA.
<tycho_> And with a DCMA takedown, if you file a counternotice, github has to put the content back up, or risk losing the safe harbour provisons.
<SphinxC0re> I could host it
<SphinxC0re> I have a 200G vps idling around
<SphinxC0re> 200gb
<tycho_> Set it up, and see whether anyone else is interested.
<tycho_> Personally, until github start taking down repo's outside DCMA, or I see a feature worth moving for, I don't see the point.
<SphinxC0re> Okay

Drop your opinions below

[worktycho]

I would like to add the point I made later: I don't know of any non-DCMA take-downs, and DCMA take downs require that if you have a license for all the content the DCMA covers, you can file a counter notice.
If you do file a counter notice, github has to put the content back up or risk losing safe harbor provisions.
The company then has to actually sue you if they want the content taken down.

[xoft]

As has been already said, the code is at not much risk - each git clone on each developer's machine has the entire history and it can be made into the new canon repo. There's not much risk here.

The issue tracker would be quite an annoyance to lose, because we have lots of links directly to it (just think of all the "fixes #XYZ" commit messages). But unless GitHub lets us somehow make a backup of that, there's almost nothing we can do about it.

I personally don't see much danger from a DMCA takedown. The project is clearly open-source and is clearly written from the start verifiably and with proper licensing. If there is a danger, it's one that GitHub may one day cease to exist for some other reason - they go bankrupt, or the NSA confiscates all their servers.

[Seadragon91]

I also don't see much risk for a DMCA takedown. Looks like the the problem with bukkit/spigot has been fixed, too. There is a new api in development named sponge (since last year).

https://www.spongepowered.org/
https://github.com/SpongePowered/Sponge
https://github.com/SpongePowered/SpongeAPI

It looks like they are not worried about a dmca takedown.
https://docs.spongepowered.org/en/about/...kkit-s-api

[Jammet]

I still remember when the open source battlenet clone was stomped into the ground, just because people still wanted to play on their local area networks. But that's Blizzard I guess. They destroyed FreeCraft just because you *can* use Warcraft assets with it. *Some* kind of backup would be nice, just in case, but I don't think Cuberite is in danger because there are other projects like it.

[LogicParrot]

The source code is automatically backed up by all developers thanks to Git.
I'll see if I can scrape the issue tracker.

[xoft]

https://backhub.co/

[sphinxc0re]

Let's do this BackHub thing. Just to be safe.

[Jammet]

I'm not sure if it's related, but if I understand what this tool does, then you could basically re-create a very basic version from a tarball if everything else was lost for some reason.
http://www.catb.org/esr/git-weave/

Written by none other than Eric Raymond, no less. Heh.