Re: [Repo-criteria-discuss] Evaluation: F for git.pantsu.cat

[Zak Rogoff]

On 05/07/2016 06:02 AM, Juuso Lapinlampi wrote:
> On Fri, May 06, 2016 at 10:41:43PM -0400, Mike Gerwitz wrote:
>> Zak: As Juuso noted, this is a small service; are we good with including
>> any service that someone is willing to help evaluate?  I think it'd be a
>> good idea, but list the most high-profile ones first.
> 
> This is not really up to me, but I'd say those which fit the criteria
> for B or A or higher make more sense to be notable and more likely
> reliable to be listed. I don't think the GNU Project's list needs to be
> fully comprehensive of all the hundreds of repository hosts which don't
> meet the criteria.
> 
> The other point is usability. In some sense those with private
> registration or non-featureful Git interfaces may be just as comparable
> to "hosting your own Git repository" on the Internet on some server,
> like yours and not easily accessible for the majority of readers
> accustomed to GitLab or Gitorious-like services.
> 
> This mailing list can be a resource for those which are also not notable
> enough, and to coordinate cooperation to help those Git repositories
> improve their criteria fulfillment and thus notability within the GNU
> Project.
> 

Hi, just chiming in from the FSF. Juuso, thanks for your evaluation. I
think it's important to post evaluations of small sites if they do well,
but not if they are at an F. If you haven't already, I recommend you
reach out to them and offer to help improve their score.

-- 
Zak Rogoff // Campaigns Manager
Free Software Foundation

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature