Issues on GitHub

Issues on GitHub

[Cal]

Should I get a GitHub account to file issues with developers?

Should I use email only?

GitHub requires proprietary software (JavaScript).

_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Issues on GitHub

[bill-auger]

On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 01:05:58 -0500 Cal wrote:
> GitHub requires proprietary software (JavaScript).

most of the github website is functional with librejs, including
opening bug reports and commenting on existing ones

_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Issues on GitHub, Issues on GitHub

[Dmitry Alexandrov]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1057 bytes --]

bill-auger <bill-auger@peers.community> wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 01:05:58 -0500 Cal wrote:
>> GitHub requires proprietary software (JavaScript).
>
> most of the github website is functional with librejs, including opening bug reports and commenting on existing ones

Yes, it’s indeed much more freedom-friendly than, say, GitLab, which is is one of those wretched websites, that are not even _readable¹_ without running ad-hoc nonfree software, yet ironically widely believed to be a better alternative.

However, GitHub still imposes nonfree software on you at the moment of registration.  Due to its nature — it’s a CAPTCHA, that is it designed to be unavoidable, there hardly any solution exists.

-
¹ GitLab is actually even more miserable in that respect, than something like https://code.gov, which honestly shows you faceplate, informing you, that its developers were unable to create a proper web-interface.  GitLab, on the other hand, presents an _incomplete_ page without any notice, basically lying to an unaware visitor.

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 487 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Issues on GitHub, Issues on GitHub

[Michael McMahon]

To join in the discussion about gitlab's librejs plan, you can find the
open ticket here: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/15621

Note: You will need to allow nonfree javascript to participate in
liberating gitlab's javascript.

Best,
Michael McMahon | Web Developer, Free Software Foundation
GPG Key: 4337 2794 C8AD D5CA 8FCF  FA6C D037 59DA B600 E3C0
https://fsf.org | https://gnu.org

On 03/27/2019 06:24 AM, Dmitry Alexandrov wrote:
> bill-auger <bill-auger@peers.community> wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 01:05:58 -0500 Cal wrote:
>>> GitHub requires proprietary software (JavaScript).
>> most of the github website is functional with librejs, including opening bug reports and commenting on existing ones
> Yes, it’s indeed much more freedom-friendly than, say, GitLab, which is is one of those wretched websites, that are not even _readable¹_ without running ad-hoc nonfree software, yet ironically widely believed to be a better alternative.
>
> However, GitHub still imposes nonfree software on you at the moment of registration.  Due to its nature — it’s a CAPTCHA, that is it designed to be unavoidable, there hardly any solution exists.
>
> -
> ¹ GitLab is actually even more miserable in that respect, than something like https://code.gov, which honestly shows you faceplate, informing you, that its developers were unable to create a proper web-interface.  GitLab, on the other hand, presents an _incomplete_ page without any notice, basically lying to an unaware visitor.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> libreplanet-discuss mailing list
> libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
> https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Issues on GitHub, Issues on GitHub

[Aaron Wolf]

On 2019-03-27 3:24 a.m., Dmitry Alexandrov wrote:
> bill-auger <bill-auger@peers.community> wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 01:05:58 -0500 Cal wrote:
>>> GitHub requires proprietary software (JavaScript).
>>
>> most of the github website is functional with librejs, including opening bug reports and commenting on existing ones
> 
> Yes, it’s indeed much more freedom-friendly than, say, GitLab, which is is one of those wretched websites, that are not even _readable¹_ without running ad-hoc nonfree software, yet ironically widely believed to be a better alternative.

Dmitry, you seem to be conflating compatibility with LibreJS (in its
current state) and non-free software. LibreJS often has false flags.
100% of GitLab's client-side JavaScript is free software. It's believed
to be a better alternative because it actually is more free. The
"community edition" such as is run at https://git.framasoft.org/ is
completely 100% free software.

Last I checked, the only non-free issue with GitLab Community Edition is
its own use of CAPTCHA as discussed at
https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/46548

Now, your complaints about GitLab failing to have a good fallback
without JavaScript — that's valid from a bad-web-design argument and I
happen to agree with you and really hate the heavy JavaScript web-app
style of modern websites.

The software-freedom related concern is that sites running all this
JavaScript, even when freely licensed, allows them to arbitrarily do a
lot of stuff people may not expect or want simply by visiting a website.
Thankfully, GitLab is something of an exception because they even
removed Google Analytics and other problematic things in direct response
to concerns from us in the free software movement.

https://about.gitlab.com/2015/05/20/gitlab-gitorious-free-software/

Anyway, keep in mind that LibreJS failing to *recognize* something as
free software does not mean the software is non-free. It may just mean
that LibreJS and the website aren't set up correctly to validate the
software's terms.

> 
> However, GitHub still imposes nonfree software on you at the moment of registration.  Due to its nature — it’s a CAPTCHA, that is it designed to be unavoidable, there hardly any solution exists.
> 
> -
> ¹ GitLab is actually even more miserable in that respect, than something like https://code.gov, which honestly shows you faceplate, informing you, that its developers were unable to create a proper web-interface.  GitLab, on the other hand, presents an _incomplete_ page without any notice, basically lying to an unaware visitor.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> libreplanet-discuss mailing list
> libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
> https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
> 


_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Issues on GitHub, Issues on GitHub

[bill-auger]

On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 09:51:26 -0400 Michael wrote:
> To join in the discussion about gitlab's librejs plan, you can find
> the open ticket here:
> https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/15621

"Opened Apr 26, 2016"

you might think that three years is enough time to decide a simple "yes
or no" question

_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Issues on GitHub, Issues on GitHub

[Cal]

On 3/27/19 5:24 AM, Dmitry Alexandrov wrote:
> bill-auger <bill-auger@peers.community> wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 01:05:58 -0500 Cal wrote:
>>> GitHub requires proprietary software (JavaScript).
>>
>> most of the github website is functional with librejs, including opening bug reports and commenting on existing ones
> 
> Yes, it’s indeed much more freedom-friendly than, say, GitLab, which is is one of those wretched websites, that are not even _readable¹_ without running ad-hoc nonfree software, yet ironically widely believed to be a better alternative.

I'll believe you when Trisquel stops using it.

_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Issues on GitHub, Issues on GitHub

[bill-auger]

On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 20:51:55 -0500 Cal wrote:
> I'll believe you when Trisquel stops using it.

FWIW, trisquel started using gitlab many years ago, when it was not
nearly as libre-friendly as it is today, so you really can not credit
it for that reason - it was also before pagure existed - i think if
that decision had to be made again today, that gitlab is not the
best choice for software freedom concerns - if any of the
full-featured, self-hosted web forges should be encouraged above
others, pagure (GPLv2+) and coding-team (AGPL) appear to have the most
libre-conscious developers, and most of their sites' functionality works
with javascript completely disabled (good engineering, yes Aaron?)

however, i would not expect to see trisquel or any gitlab users change
any time soon, mostly because it is very difficult to get your data out
of those forges - almost all of them have an inherent "vendor lock-in"
effect - pagure is the only one that makes complete migrations simple,
which is the best reason to favor it IMHO

_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Issues on GitHub, Issues on GitHub

[Aaron Wolf]

FWIW, in addition to
https://www.gnu.org/software/repo-criteria-evaluation.html which are
outdated somewhat and don't cover much, I've tried to keep updating this
list:
https://wiki.snowdrift.coop/market-research/flo-repos

I've only had substantial time myself with GitHub, GitLab, SourceForge,
and Gitorious (long defunct). My personal sense is that GitHub and
GitLab each have pros and cons in terms of features but GitLab is
somewhat more aligned with software freedom but both are imperfect.
SourceForge is usable and acceptable enough, but I dislike their
ad-focus (note that it is not the awful stuff that the previous owners
did though).

I've heard good things about Phabricator (used by Wikimedia among others).

SourceHut is the one I'm most excited about that looks to be an effort
to make a truly updated, good engineering (not JavaScript crap), and
fully-free. It's early state for the project, but it's the one I'm
cheering the most and want to see really succeed. I haven't actually
used it myself yet.


On 2019-03-27 8:14 p.m., bill-auger wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 20:51:55 -0500 Cal wrote:
>> I'll believe you when Trisquel stops using it.
> 
> FWIW, trisquel started using gitlab many years ago, when it was not
> nearly as libre-friendly as it is today, so you really can not credit
> it for that reason - it was also before pagure existed - i think if
> that decision had to be made again today, that gitlab is not the
> best choice for software freedom concerns - if any of the
> full-featured, self-hosted web forges should be encouraged above
> others, pagure (GPLv2+) and coding-team (AGPL) appear to have the most
> libre-conscious developers, and most of their sites' functionality works
> with javascript completely disabled (good engineering, yes Aaron?)
> 
> however, i would not expect to see trisquel or any gitlab users change
> any time soon, mostly because it is very difficult to get your data out
> of those forges - almost all of them have an inherent "vendor lock-in"
> effect - pagure is the only one that makes complete migrations simple,
> which is the best reason to favor it IMHO
> 
> _______________________________________________
> libreplanet-discuss mailing list
> libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
> https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
> 


_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Issues on GitHub, Issues on GitHub

[Leah Rowe]

Hi

On 28/03/2019 01:51, Cal wrote:
> 
> 
> On 3/27/19 5:24 AM, Dmitry Alexandrov wrote:
>> bill-auger <bill-auger@peers.community> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 01:05:58 -0500 Cal wrote:
>>>> GitHub requires proprietary software (JavaScript).
>>>
>>> most of the github website is functional with librejs, including opening bug reports and commenting on existing ones
>>
>> Yes, it’s indeed much more freedom-friendly than, say, GitLab, which is is one of those wretched websites, that are not even _readable¹_ without running ad-hoc nonfree software, yet ironically widely believed to be a better alternative.
> 
> I'll believe you when Trisquel stops using it.

Just letting everyone know, GitLab CE is indeed free software. I'm
currently setting it up for libreboot.org even (have to get gogs->gitlab
migration working before making the gitlab site public)

several other well-known projects (including the GNOME project, and
debian project) use it too.

It's the enterprise edition that's non-free. the community edition is free

-- 
Leah Rowe

Libreboot developer and project founder.

Use free software. Free as in freedom.
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

Use a free BIOS - https://libreboot.org/
Use a free operating system, GNU+Linux.

Support computer user freedom
https://sfconservancy.org/
https://fsf.org/ - https://gnu.org/

Minifree Ltd, trading as Ministry of Freedom | Registered in England,
No. 9361826 | VAT No. GB202190462
Registered Office: 19 Hilton Road, Canvey Island, Essex SS8 9QA, UK |
Web: https://minifree.org/

_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Issues on GitHub

[Matt Lee]

You can of course download and install the 'hub' client from GitHub.

This gives you access to most features of the site using the command line.
Many 'stros have it already packaged, but
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/github/hub/master/README.md is a plain
text list of installation instructions.
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss

Re: Issues on GitHub

[bill-auger]

On Thu, 28 Mar 2019 10:50:44 -0400 Matt wrote:
> You can of course download and install the 'hub' client from GitHub.

of course, if one does not object to using a command line tool, one
could simply install weboob and that would avoid the very same dilema
for hundreds of websites all at once

_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss