I am submitting this patch because the other client links available -
from Collabnet, YOUR EMPLOYER - require registration. That creates a
bad and manipulative user experience. You can fix it by adding these
links. Or, you can remove the registration requirement from the
Collabnet downloads. Or, you can remove the Collabnet downloads and
substitute the Assembla downloads, if you are so concerned about
reducing the number of links.
It's interesting that you bring up the svnhostingcomparison site. That
is an advertisement for Codesion/Collabnet, paid for by Collabnet,
masquerading as a review site. I wonder how Assembla and Codesion would
look in a fair comparison of hosting services.
Yes, the links we put up are mostly duplicates of things that you can
get from Collabnet. That's appropriate in this venue, which is about
supporting Apache subversion users. Shortly we will be putting up
clients with new open source features that we have been working on, like
EasySVN and Newmerge. If you want to use your seniority to turn this
sort of thing out of the Apache community, then I guess there is always
the option of forking.
On 12/1/2011 7:26 PM, Mark Phippard wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 5:38 PM, Andy Singleton<andy_at_assembla.com> wrote:
>> Here is a patch to update the Binary Package page with links to client
>> packages. This will make it easier for users to upgrade to 1.7.
>> This patch is an update to
>> This patch keeps the links in alphabetical order.
>> BASIC FEATURES
>> * No registration is required. No cookies or other user tracking are used
>> * Recent stable versions of Apache Subversion clients compiled and tested by
>> Assembla or WANdisco
>> * Client only. The majority of download users are looking for clients
>> * Directly link to each operating system with anchor links
> I think that the page you have created with the downloads you want to
> provide is well executed and looks nice. But I do not think we should
> provide links to it on our download page.
> Ultimately, your page is just another version of our page with your
> preferred clients linked. Your links are just going to the same
> places as our existing links do so why should we add more options on
> our page that are just going to the same eventual downloads that we
> already list?
> It makes perfect sense to me that a site that offers Subversion
> hosting, such as yourself, would have a convenient page to download
> clients. But consider how many SVN hosting sites there are? This is
> just a sampling:
> If just a small number of these sites have a page similar to the one
> you created and then submitted patches to add links to their page from
> our page, our page will just become less and less useful. I cannot
> see why we would accept your links but not then later turn away
> someone else that creates a similar page to yours.
> You have created a nice page and you have ample opportunity on your
> site to put it in front of your customers so that they can download
> clients easily. That seems like it should be good enough to serve
> your customers well.
> This is of course just my opinion but I am -0 on accepting this for
> the reasons stated.
Received on 2011-12-02 05:12:48 CET