On Jan 7, 8:16 ¨Âí¬ ÔéáçÎïçõåéòá ¼ôêîïçõå®®®Àïïíáóôåò®ãïí÷òïôåº
> Daniel Berger escreveu:
>
> > On Jan 7, 2:10 pm, Trans <transf... / gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > <snip>
>
> >> To me GForge seems very dated. I think GitHub is much better example
> >> of the future. It has most of the features developers need.
>
> > I don't see a way to submit bugs.
> > I don't see forums.
> > I don't see mailing lists.
> > I don't see a way to broadcast announcements.
> > I don't see download stats.
> > I don't see a way to monitor what new Ruby projects have been created.
> > I don't see a way to logically group different, but related, libraries
> > together.
> > I don't see a way to attach external documents.
> > I don't see a way to track all of the bugs and feature requests I've
> > submitted on other projects.
> > I don't see a place to paste code snippets.
>
> > Github, an example of the future? The future isn't all it's cracked up
> > to be apparently.

Dan, I think you over value some of these features -- download stats
on Rubyforge aren't very accurate, announcements would be better
handled by a dedicated mailing list, and why attach external documents
when we can just add them to our repos? Also, GitHub does have code
snippets.

Yes, some additional features would be nice. But I see no reason why
they eventually can't be added -- I'm sure the GitHub folks have plans
for the future too.

In any case, I don't think it's a good idea to think in terms of
shutting the original Rubyforge down and starting Rubyforge2 up,
rather I think it would be better to make a smooth transition. Let
people move over at their leisure. The first adopters can be the ones
who are okay with the more limited feature set.

T.