Re:Why Slack is inappropriate for open source communications
by rsync on Tuesday April 11, 2017 @11:27PM
(#14094498)
"You can still create a Digital Ocean droplet, Docker container, or VM Image - and do the same thing (upload & forget)."
Wouldn't it be easier - and free - to "upload and forget" onto github ?
If someone had a software release, why wouldn't they choose github to be the release point - even if it's just a single tarball ?
Are there costs involved in hosting binaries/tarfiles on github ?
Re:Why Slack is inappropriate for open source communications
by 31h on Tuesday April 11, 2017 @11:57PM
(#14094638)
Can you clarify what you are driving at with these questions? First off, a lot of people prefer hosted source repositories other than github (e.g. hub.darcs.net, gitlab.com, My Own Private Server). Github naturally imposes various limitations on their "free" plans.
Re:Why Slack is inappropriate for open source communications
by rsync on Wednesday April 12, 2017 @12:03AM
(#14094659)
I'm not getting at anything. I'm genuinely curious.
Personally, I self-host everything on my personal www homepage.
If I did not self-host everything, I assume I would put it up on github, right ?
You can still create a Digital Ocean droplet, Docker container, or VM Image - and do the same thing (upload & forget). Then it's up to the user to pay $5/mo to host it, a process which doesn't need to take more than a few mouse clicks.