[Offtopic] Best/Easiest Open Source repository?

[Dave]

I know some folks here have projects on one of the open source
repositories. I've got a very simple app which I would like to make
public. Before I just go ahead and use SourceForge, I thought I'd ask
for other opinions from people who have been through this before.

Can someone recommend an open source repository which is most simple to
setup and administer for a one-man project that will probably see little
or no maintenance in the future? I would also like to avoid complicated
source management and/or the requirement to install a source management
system on my PC.

Thanks.

--
computerjock AT mail DOT com

[Gerald W. Lester]

Not wanting to start a religious war, but since you asked: Fossil
(http://fossil-scm.org) and http://chiselapp.com


--
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Gerald W. Lester, President, KNG Consulting LLC |
| Email: Gerald...@kng-consulting.net |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+

[Mike Griffiths]

Well, the immediate answer is "Anything but SourceForge". They kinda blow these days, and their underhanded tactics which include paying people to bundle malware with their downloads means lots of people will avoid SF-hosted projects like the plague now.

Personally I'd say Github.

[EL]

Am Montag, 14. September 2015 21:57:43 UTC+2 schrieb Gerald W. Lester:

> > Can someone recommend an open source repository which is most simple to
> > setup and administer for a one-man project that will probably see little or
> > no maintenance in the future? I would also like to avoid complicated source
> > management and/or the requirement to install a source management system on
> > my PC.
>
> Not wanting to start a religious war, but since you asked: Fossil
> (http://fossil-scm.org) and http://chiselapp.com

+1 for Fossil & Chiselapp.

The one and only thing that is really missing in fossil repos is a built in download area for releases (maybe something that creates a release tarball out of a release tag automatically, when users click it in a download area). Everything else is just great, imho, and best fit for the described requirements.

--
EL

[Dave]

Thanks. I've downloaded github & fossil, both for my windows box. I will
look at them further.

I did notice that github has a handy 'download zip' button while
fossil/chisel required me to click on the funny string of letters/number
on the "files" page to get a "download zip/tar" choice. Then, it
required me to "log in" as anonymous. This would put off many windows
users I suspect.

I'll look at them in more depth. If having a direct download link to
publish is only possible for one, that would probably be the deciding
factor.

[Gerald W. Lester]

Every leaf has a tarball -- for a release of TclWs, all I do is tag it and
create an event. On the even description page (aka Release Notes) I list
what was fixed and point to the tarball and zip file.

[EL]

Am Dienstag, 15. September 2015 02:48:22 UTC+2 schrieb Gerald W. Lester:

> Every leaf has a tarball -- for a release of TclWs, all I do is tag it and
> create an event. On the even description page (aka Release Notes) I list
> what was fixed and point to the tarball and zip file.
>

Where is the event description page (aka release notes)? I admit that I just started to use fossil and moved over a git repository, so I only have the standard setup so far and not much experience...
If there was an easy way to provide release downloads for *users* (not developers, who know where to look for release tags and on which commit hash to click), then I could move away from sourceforge completely :).

--
EL

[Gerald W. Lester]

Take a look at how http://core.tcl.tk/tclws

You basically use the Wiki and Tech-notes (see the timeline).

[Dave]

On 9/14/2015 7:48 PM, Gerald W. Lester wrote:
>
> Every leaf has a tarball -- for a release of TclWs, all I do is tag it
> and create an event. On the even description page (aka Release Notes) I
> list what was fixed and point to the tarball and zip file.
>

I've been exploring fossil. I created the "home" wiki page and found
that I could add download links as follows:

1. Go to Files and click the check-in id.
2. Copy the URL's for the ZIP and Tarball download
3. For the ZIP, it looks something like:

http://localhost:8080/zip/BL2Guide-6933e78bf8.zip?uuid=6933e78bf89d2b15
Just remove the host and the "-...". The URL will now look like:
/zip/BL2Guide.zip?uuid=6933e78bf89d2b15

For the Tarball, it looks something like:

http://localhost:8080/tarball/BL2Guide-6933e78bf8.tar.gz?uuid=6933e78bf89d2b151e5992bc6c8576017cff698f
Again remove the host and the "-...". The URL will now look like:
/tarball/BL2Guide.tar.gz?uuid=6933e78bf89d2b151e5992bc6c8576017cff698f
4. Edit your download page (mine is the "home" page) and add the
modified URL's as download links
5. Now, when I click on either link, I get either BL2Guide.zip or
BL2Guide.tgz (maybe Chrome changes the .tar.gz to .tgz?) and the top
directory is just "BL2Guide", not "BL2Guide-xxxxx".


I have not tried putting my project on Chisel yet, so I don't know if
that will change what I've written, nor do I have enough experience with
fossil to know if this is a valid thing to do.

[Gerald W. Lester]

Chisel will not change what you just wrote -- and it is a perfectly valid
thing to do.

Welcome to Fossil!