Getting StructureMap off SourceForge, Thoughts?

The original discussion for this topic is here:  http://groups.google.com/group/structuremap-users/browse_thread/thread/6d579f4e9b508c66

 

All,

I’ve never liked SourceForge and it’s a PITA for me to use even though it’s gotten better over the years.  I’d like
to move StructureMap off SourceForge and more importantly, get a real
Wiki site up so that we have at least a fighting chance of keeping the
documentation up to date.  On the other hand, I get a significant
number of patches from you guys (thanks for that) and I’d also like a
better way of handling those submissions — and making it easier for
*you* to get involved.

Right now, Josh and I are thinking about moving StructureMap to GitHub
(you knew that was coming) and trying to use the Wiki support on
Github for now.  Granted, Git is weird as hell for those of us used to
SVN, but GitHub has some huge advantages for OSS community
development.  I’d *love* to start managing StructureMap patches
through GitHub “pull” requests (or whatever the correct lingo is).

Any thoughts?  Volunteers? ;)

Jeremy

About Jeremy Miller

Jeremy is the Chief Software Architect at Dovetail Software, the coolest ISV in Austin. Jeremy began his IT career writing "Shadow IT" applications to automate his engineering documentation, then wandered into software development because it looked like more fun. Jeremy is the author of the open source StructureMap tool for Dependency Injection with .Net, StoryTeller for supercharged acceptance testing in .Net, and one of the principal developers behind FubuMVC. Jeremy's thoughts on all things software can be found at The Shade Tree Developer at http://codebetter.com/jeremymiller.
This entry was posted in StructureMap. Bookmark the permalink. Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post.
  • http://programmer.brettveenstra.com Brett Veenstra

    +1 Mercurial / BitBucket or CodePlex

  • http://codebetter.com/members/kylebaley/default.aspx Kyle Baley

    I know you won’t do it but given CodePlex’s buggy support for SVN, I don’t have a lot of faith in the Mercurial integration.

  • http://codebetter.com/members/jmiller/default.aspx Jeremy D. Miller

    All,

    Nothing against Mercurial, but one of the other projects I work with is already on Github (FubuMVC), and I don’t want to contend with learning two new DVCS’s right now.

    And yes, I’ll admit to some latent anti-MS bias in not wanting to move to CodePlex, but yes, CodePlex moved from the no way in hell column to strongly consider by supporting Mercurial. TFS is a definite non-starter for me.

  • andrex

    I vote for codeplex + mercurial

  • ..

    I am big fan of CodePlex and now they added support for Mercurial too. Good luck with your choice.

  • http://derickbailey.lostechies.com Derick Bailey

    +1 for Github . I have no problems with github’s issue list or wiki… don’t know why people complain about them.

    would also love to help out with the migration if you guys need any help.

  • Kyle Szklenski

    I’d be willing to do any editorial work needed on the wiki. I know it’s less prestigious than extending the documentation and submitting patches, but it’s something I’m very, very good at.

  • http://learnaholic.me xajler

    You could be original and go for BitBucket.org and Mercurial.
    Mercurial is as same as Git, and BitBucket.org is great code hosting provider, and in my opinion much faster than GitHub which chokes every now and then.

  • http://michaelstechnical.blogpost.com Michael Hedgpeth

    Great idea. I’ve been wanting to learn about GitHub and this will give me an excuse to do so.

  • http://realfiction.net Frank Quednau

    Yes, we knew that was coming…is FubuMVC already there?
    Otherwise: Github, yay!
    The svn against SM trunk felt really slow lately, so moving would be a bonus.
    Issue tracking is a bit basic but with colored tags I think it works pretty nice. Pushing/pulling stuff on SM should be fun. What do you mean by volunteers? Getting the Wiki going? Doing the move?

  • http://jagregory.com James Gregory

    +1 for github.

    I’ll be more than happy to help out with any migration and/or learning-curve issues.

  • Erno

    Hehehehe, I vote for Codeplex :-) Sorry I couldn’t help myself but hey, it even supports Mucerial now as well :-P

  • http://phatboyg.lostechies.com/ Chris Patterson

    You know my answer already, “Git ‘er done!”

  • http://www.kenegozi.com/blog Ken Egozi

    GitHub is great.
    The wiki is cool.
    As for feature/issue tracking, it suck.
    The good news are that lighthouse (lighthouseapp.com) can host OSS projects for free, and there is a seamless integration between the two.

  • http://webgambit.com Karthik Hariharan

    +1 for GitHub. Makes it easy to download the trunk and compile it without pulling via SVN too.

  • Jeremy Gray

    @Jeremy Miller – +1 for Git and GitHub.

    @Mike re: Google Code – Mercurial is primarily (entirely?) Python. Python is Guido is Python. Guido works at Google. Ergo. :)

  • Rob Conery

    I’ll happily contribute a Tekpub coupon for you and your contributors for our Git series. Github is goodness, even better is Gist for embedding code in your wiki, having it be shareable.

  • http://computeristsolutions.com josh

    Absolutely moved to git and github. We have FLuentMigrator hosted there as well as lots of other good OSS projects.

  • http://jonathan-oliver.blogspot.com Jonathan Oliver

    +1 for Github. Git seems to have the momentum. Also, Uncle Bob prefers Git.

    According to the Google Code DVCS analysis link posted above, the conclusion was that “In terms of features, Git is more powerful…” Google went with Mercurial because it was better at HTTP, which is something they valued/wanted.

    In git, there are about 2-3 commands I use everyday, and about 2-3 more each week. Actually, I’m almost never using the command line anymore because of TortoiseGit. I just went to the command line because I wanted to know what I was doing–it took about two days to learn. Jimmy Bogard and Oren/Ayende recently converted–you should ask what their opinion is…

  • http://paulbatum.com Paul Batum

    +1 Github.

    There is more chance that I would contribute if Structure Map was on GitHub – its just lower friction.

  • http://MurrayOn.NET/ Mike Murray

    Google Code chose Mercurial over Git: http://code.google.com/p/support/wiki/DVCSAnalysis

    I have no opinion on the matter, but thought the decision was interesting and noteworthy.

  • http://www.mohundro.com/blog/ David Mohundro

    I second the move to github – I’d be happy to help the move over, too, though I’m 90% sure github has built in support to create a git repo from a subversion repo, so the move wouldn’t (shouldn’t?) take any work.

  • http://jdhardy.blogspot.com jdhardy

    There’s also http://bitbucket.org; it’s basically a GitHub for Mercurial. Mercurial is significantly less weird than Git if you’re coming from SVN, and has better Windows support.

  • http://brianc.me/blog Brian

    Absolutely should move it to github. I would *love* to contribute via pull requests. SVN is weird as hell for those of us used to Git.