[Python-Dev] Move selected documentation repos to PSF BitBucket account? (original) (raw)

Benjamin Peterson benjamin at python.org
Fri Nov 21 17:06:52 CET 2014

On Fri, Nov 21, 2014, at 11:00, Donald Stufft wrote:

> On Nov 21, 2014, at 10:26 AM, Barry Warsaw <barry at python.org> wrote: > > On Nov 21, 2014, at 10:36 PM, Nick Coghlan wrote: > >> I'd been taking "must be hosted in PSF infrastructure" as a hard >> requirement, but MAL pointed out earlier this evening that in the age >> of DVCS's, that requirement may not make sense: if you avoid tightly >> coupling your automation to a particular DVCS host's infrastructure, >> then reverting back to self-hosting (if that becomes necessary for >> some reason) is mostly just a matter of "hg push". >> >> If that "must be self-hosted" constraint is removed, then the obvious >> candidate for Mercurial hosting that supports online editing + pull >> requests is the PSF's BitBucket account. > > For the record, I object to moving official PSF resources to proprietary, > closed-source infrastructure that we do not control or have access to[*]. > > As nice and friendly as BitBucket or any other code hosting source is today, > there are many reasons why I think this is a bad idea for official > branches. We are beholden to their policies and operations, which may not > align with PSF policies or principles today or in the future. We will not be > able to customize the experience for our own needs. We will not have access > to the underlying resources should we need them for any purpose. We cannot > take action ourselves if some problem occurs, e.g. banning an offensive user. > > You're right that in a world of dvcs, branches can be mirrored anywhere. For > that reason, I have no problem allowing developers to use non-PSF controlled > resources unofficially if it makes their work easier and doesn't conflict > with their own principles. However, in such cases, I still believe that the > official, master, blessed repositories remain on PSF controlled > infrastructure. Surely that too is possible in the world of dvcs, right? > > Cheers, > -Barry > > [*] Please note that I am not objecting to our use of lower-level resources > donated by our generous sponsors. It's a fine line perhaps, but I have no > problem with a wiki running on a VM hosted on some donated hardware, since we > still have full access to the machine, the OS, and the application software. Personally I care less about proprietary and closed-source and care a lot more about lock-in. Thus my big problem using Bitbucket for these things is that if we ever want to leave bitbucket it becomes a lot harder because you have a bunch of links and such pointing at bitbucket instead of a python.org domain. They do offer a redirect feature but that is dependent on them not taking that away in the future. (They also offer a CNAME feature but if you use it you lose the ability to use TLS, which is also a non starter for me). Sadly this also leaves out my favorite host site of Github :/. Something like Github Enterprise or Atlassian stash which are able to be migrated away from are better in this regards. Ironically we do use a propetiary/closed-source/hosted solution for https://status.python.org/ but it’s not terribly difficult to migrate away from that if we ever wanted to.

The more significant one is probably Fastly.

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list