[Owasp-leaders] [GPC] Remote Repositories on SourceForge

Brad Causey bradcausey at gmail.com
Thu Jan 5 18:15:34 UTC 2012


I think it's a great idea Michael.

Jason, do you have some time this week or next for a quick call about me
taking point on a FAQ?


-Brad Causey
CISSP, MCSE, C|EH, CIFI, CGSP

http://www.owasp.org
--
"Si vis pacem, para bellum"
--


On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 12:04 PM, Michael Coates <michael.coates at owasp.org>wrote:

> Ah. I understand now. Perhaps we have an FAQ somewhere we can simply point
> people at?
>
> If not, maybe thats a good way to help spread the right info and clear up
> any confusions.
>
>
>
> Michael Coates
> OWASP
> michael.coates at owasp.org
>
>
>
> On Jan 5, 2012, at 9:47 AM, Dennis Groves wrote:
>
> > Michael,
> >
> > I agree it makes perfect sense. However, I am personally involved in
> OWASP and it is/was unclear to me (and others); therefore my concern is how
> it is percieved by those who people who are not already involved with
> OWASP. Thus, I am suggesting that perhaps a clearer message is in order?
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > --
> > Dennis Groves, MSc
> > dennis.groves at owasp.org
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thursday, 5 January 2012 at 14:30, Michael Coates wrote:
> >
> >> Dennis,
> >>
> >> I hoping that Jason's email cleared up any confusion for you (copied
> below). This approach is a store for meta data with no impact on code
> repository. Basically, everything moves forward nicely and we now have a
> place where people can see a concise listing of all the information about
> projects. No impact to where a project stores there code, really not much
> of an inconvenience at all.
> >>
> >> I'm excited to see where this goes and happy that they went through a
> process to evaluate many different options.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Michael Coates
> >> OWASP
> >> michael.coates at owasp.org (mailto:michael.coates at owasp.org)
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Begin forwarded message:
> >>
> >>> Christian,
> >>>
> >>> We are using SourceForge as a mechanism to organize our project
> metadata and display our library of projects in a consumable fashion. The
> code repository functions and other features of SourceForge are *available*
> to project leaders, but they are not required to use SourceForge as their
> code repository. It is an *option* for project leaders and a choice to be
> made by the project leader. My understanding is that the ESAPI project
> decided to transition to SourceForge, as is their choice.
> >>>
> >>> Regarding mailing lists, a combination of automated processes and
> OWASP staff largely maintain the mailing lists. Management of mailing lists
> is not a GPC responsibility. Nonetheless, Kate explains in the very thread
> you cite explains the mechanism that creates the leader's list, which
> explains your prior predicament.
> >>>
> >>> Regarding selection of SourceForge, as has been previously mentioned,
> we had an open RFP for project infrastructure. We evaluated the proposals
> we received and chose the best candidate proposal (
> http://sl.owasp.org/gpcws-jun11-proceedings#h.4z9gh8ff79fg). There will
> always be concerns about decisions and choices made, but organizations
> cannot stand perpetually waiting for the fictional perfect solution that
> simultaneously solves everything and is amenable to 100% of the audience.
> Organizations do the best that they can with what the responses they
> receive.
> >>>
> >>> -Jason
> >>
> >> On Jan 5, 2012, at 4:23 AM, Dennis Groves wrote:
> >>
> >>>> On Thursday, 5 January 2012 at 08:22, psiinon wrote:
> >>>>> previously I got the impression that all of the OWASP projects would
> be required to migrate to SourceForge, which I think would have been a
> problem for some projects.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I have the same impression, which I think this is a very daft idea,
> its like requiring people to use a dead horse in whatever they do!?!
> >>>>
> >>>> This is a great way to loose people, projects and years of momentum
> (I have personally met several projects OWASP has lost because of this). If
> people are willing to contribute - OWASP needs to get out of the way and
> let them contribute! OWASP should be greasing the wheels, not putting the
> breaks on!
> >>>>
> >>>> Further, all the 'cool kids' use github and the like these days - In
> fact, even the *bitter old men* like myself use git these days… ;-)
> >>>>
> >>>> OWASP really needs to undo this damage, personally, I advise people
> to do whatever they are comfortable with - just as long as the contribute
> and grow OWASP. We need to foster and encourage adoption not put up
> barriers.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Cheers,
> >>>>
> >>>> Dennis Groves
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Global-projects-committee mailing list
> >>> Global-projects-committee at lists.owasp.org (mailto:
> Global-projects-committee at lists.owasp.org)
> >>> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/global-projects-committee
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Global-projects-committee mailing list
> Global-projects-committee at lists.owasp.org
> https://lists.owasp.org/mailman/listinfo/global-projects-committee
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.owasp.org/pipermail/owasp-leaders/attachments/20120105/835a6aea/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the OWASP-Leaders mailing list