[core-workflow] GitHub reviews comments on b.p.o

[Brett Cannon]

There has been talk in the past of setting up a cronjob somewhere that
backs up all data stored at GitHub in some way for contingency purposes. I
think it's a totally reasonable thing to do, but I don't plan to hold up
the migration for it.

On Fri, 29 Jul 2016 at 04:09 Petr Viktorin <encukou at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 07/28/2016 06:21 PM, Senthil Kumaran wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 7:48 AM, R. David Murray <rdmurray at bitdance.com>
> wrote:
> >> The obvious alternative is to just post a link to the PR with some
> >> summary about what was posted (perhaps who and how many comments?).  I
> >> don't have an opinion at this point which would be better, but the core
> >> of the proposed patch would be the same, just the output would be
> >> different.
> >
> > This sounds better to me. If the person in the  nosy list is
> > interested, they can be added to the nosy list of PR, so that  they
> > can subsequent updates from there.
>
> One case for copying comments is to create an archive for the case that
> Github goes bankrupt or turns evil. This seems very unlikely now, but
> Python should be planning for long-term contingencies. AFAIK there's no
> formal agreement between the PSF and Github that PR archives will remain
> accessible.
>
> _______________________________________________
> core-workflow mailing list
> core-workflow at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/core-workflow
> This list is governed by the PSF Code of Conduct:
> https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/core-workflow/attachments/20160729/4a7032ae/attachment.html>