A relevant story appeared on Slashdot today:
========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"http://ask.slashdot.org/story/13/03/09/1434241/ask-slashdot-where-to-host-many-small-related-projects"
linktext was:"Where to Host Many Small, Related Projects?"
====================================
. It contained a link to this Wikipedia article about comparing
========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open_source_software_hosting_facilities"
linktext was:"open source software hosting facilities"
====================================
.

ISTM we want in loose order of priority:

• free as in beer
  Git
  ad free
  team enabled
  runs on Free (as in speech) software

YMMV

Gitorious looks promising but it has a
========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"http://en.gitorious.org/tos/"
linktext was:"500 MB/month bandwidth cap"
====================================
.

I've been thinking that we might want a small private Git server (perhaps on DaveServer) for early development combined with a public server that can handle more bandwidth although maybe this approach is too cautious.

We also might want to consider developing a standard approach for sharing large files (perhaps this has already been done). I like the technical choices behind the new
========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"https://mega.co.nz/"
linktext was:"Mega"
====================================
site but I have not actually tried it yet.

What about using torrent files and seed server(s) with remote access to it's torrent client? It can be used for anything except apt-get.

I probably didn't establish the context well enough. I was talking about antiX software development, not final iso distribution.

Torrents really aren't appropriate for software development for a number of reasons, just like they wouldn't be appropriate for handling email. For software development, you really want something like Git or svn but I'd prefer Git. Torrents are good for iso releases where you have large files and many recipients.

We have a git repo at Sourceforge, but it is not used or properly set up.


========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"https://sourceforge.net/p/antix-linux/code/"
linktext was:"https://sourceforge.net/p/antix-linux/code/"
====================================


Github seems to be popular.

The
========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open_source_software_hosting_facilities"
linktext was:"tables I linked to"
====================================
are very informative.

GitHub has 70% of the Git market but it is not ad-free nor does it run on Free software.

Gitorious is the next most popular (according to Gitorious).

Alioth is mostly for Debian related projects. It runs on Free software and has no ads. It also provides bug tracking, forums, and a mailing list.

========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"https://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/sourceforge/wiki/WikiStart"
linktext was:"https://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/sourc ... /WikiStart"
====================================


shows what is available on Sourceforge.

I'm looking at Sourceforge since antiX alresdy has an account there.

I'm open to whatever people think is best for us.

gitorious was already mentioned above.
for the #debian-diaspora project ( packaging the ruby gems for diaspora, finally diaspora itself) gitorious is used.
It works ok.

At home i use gitolite. It is easy to setup, but i would not know how to make it accessible for others from the internet
(i assume it works and i assume it is easy, but i simply don't know).

git itself is a pain in the butt, of course (in other words: anything but easy).

nadir wrote:git itself is a pain in the butt, of course (in other words: anything but easy).

Reminds me of a Winston Churchill quote:

Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.

I found git to be vastly superior to svn and svn was much better than cvs. The main thing of course is that you can merge branches in git without losing the comments from one branch. That's why Linus created git. I also like the commands that make it easy choose which files will be in the repository and which are private files that are not backed up.

I think a version control system is almost essential for serious software development (even by just one person) but where it really shines is when you have multiple people working on a project.

I guess i fully agree.
I tried to point out that i am far from really understanding git
(and i don't even know the other revision control systems you mentioned. That is: i never used them
But i think i just read that one of it's advantages is that it is a"distirbuted resivion control system". Perhap i misunderstood something)

btw: It looks like sourceforge offers git too:

========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/sourceforge/wiki/Git"
linktext was:"http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/sourceforge/wiki/Git"
====================================

I believe the"merging branches" feature is what enables git to be a distributed version control system.