From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, T_DKIM_INVALID shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B47C0200B9 for ; Mon, 7 May 2018 12:18:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751969AbeEGMSE (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 May 2018 08:18:04 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-f65.google.com ([74.125.82.65]:34847 "EHLO mail-wm0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751860AbeEGMSD (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 May 2018 08:18:03 -0400 Received: by mail-wm0-f65.google.com with SMTP id o78-v6so15064562wmg.0 for ; Mon, 07 May 2018 05:18:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=hXexKTEyCyz3/eZDmGaqV28U8qFdV3lFbep6CUg9KTo=; b=gX8TUxcxOnzcPB7G5h/xdldNd5gaMu+b4tqqlxWGAaYPgAenqNty5IycpDIkPcdMv1 jdLAY8qaEPjSmxU/DolepI/Z93WtXknoQPZlbhoouwKEe9znHTmfNX/R3/CKP1j+xlsr 3pXppM6tnPxNhtUaSZ8CVIylcOk+U5jUmIEbbYHhEebGzkO+EcL0nuxtYKwQrpC4pO9d SJXKMmama6YN4KvtM67DIrRhCyI3iJ561CgdEMIA0/911eY3Whhb+oaiRkq2tTeQPJoE RQmjBa6Dw93mrplf35DOqhci38Llw5cRqY8FeM1fqB4O3OgCbZgcz96QzkBhQWiYrXot aBrw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=hXexKTEyCyz3/eZDmGaqV28U8qFdV3lFbep6CUg9KTo=; b=SGa61uxMrjSExVU4G3+6pgZziTxQBNnL4h1WHsiXLMSW5Iqscn/dvLQDvrH9g0drxX uxXcNSr4CfkFyKcsaGuoI6D7b842n0GWA/RUEsAtaiW84yR50SpJZiGdQtQDzfOVyM5S sdWeU7nY0yG1zPYA9uS5UOlMKnanBQEJ0yIR2NmAhdvOzxuLXqTjtkBScClCpRS5pHH8 zqRhURjJniTwkaWvL++hachnTI9OHG4UV1ubFYGy/BIVD4hMvPLSW+npXERglyOmVlmv bVjSR4roU3vmLKke2FFmQ8q9fzaVpef0NfFzrI1gnF8d33aYvty1a/vsYjSe5JHfIglt rZ4w== X-Gm-Message-State: ALKqPwfFrIBHJM17jR2ZN+n1Jk1KSfsIapF3Zm10wvEpJ9qb5rw2Wqtn VjNwLaxpOXo7lKd4oS3M4VI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AB8JxZr2T5G9kcfnGm+N3gmgWWOxBP132RIkdJV7/+MCPNRGIePmepj3sulxKq1ioFpoB/Euc1lY8Q== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:6d97:: with SMTP id b23-v6mr674639wmi.86.1525695481472; Mon, 07 May 2018 05:18:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (112.68.155.104.bc.googleusercontent.com. [104.155.68.112]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a129-v6sm6311074wme.3.2018.05.07.05.18.00 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Mon, 07 May 2018 05:18:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jeff King Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: main url for linking to git source? References: <20180507063713.GA28961@sigill.intra.peff.net> Date: Mon, 07 May 2018 21:18:00 +0900 In-Reply-To: <20180507063713.GA28961@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Mon, 7 May 2018 02:37:14 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King writes: > The git-scm.com site currently links to https://github.com/git/git for > the (non-tarball) source code. Somebody raised the question[1] of > whether it should point to kernel.org instead. Do people find one > interface more or less pleasing than the other? Do we want to prefer > kernel.org as more "official" or less commercial? > > I could see arguments both ways, so I thought I'd take a straw poll of > what people on the list think. > > -Peff > > [1] https://github.com/git/git-scm.com/pull/1202 I personally do not think 'the' main url for linking to git source does not exist and depends on what the URL is going to be used for. In the context of the cited PR#1202, for example, the first hunk is about a URL that appears in a sentence like this (paraphrased): "... If you want to build from the source and fix bugs yourself, use this URL to clone and try the next branch; the issue you have may have already been solved ...". The URL is *clearly* about feeding it to "git clone" so prettyness or familiarlity of the Web UI at that URL does not matter an iota. Unless one of k.org or github.com has far superiour bandwidth and latency over the other, I do not think it matters which one is recommended in the documentation. But perhaps in another context in the same document (I didn't closely look at the rest of PR#1202), a URL may be involved in viewing a patch in Gitweb/cgit interface. In such a context, Web UI's familiarity would matter a lot more.