The data we have is that very few people used (and use) the open-source
version of Transifex. Some of those who did, were using an even older
version of Transifex (0.9) which we weren't actively maintaining. We have
asked around and carefully reviewed whether a move like this will have a
measurable outcome. In the end, there is an open-source repo available .
It's old and unmaintained, but it's there to fork and hack on.
On Mon, Jul 7, 2014 at 6:48 PM, Miroslav Suchý <msuchy(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On 07/03/2014 04:20 PM, Dimitris Glezos wrote:
> It's a good thing that this came up, it'd be nice to have a clear
> decision from the Fedora part. I explained in detail
> the log & reasoning behind the decision to stop maintaining the
> open-source branch in the GitHub issue Rahul provided.
I understood that it costed you a lot of time to provide sources, which
works for everybody and which were rarely used. So you stopped releasing it.
But can you release the code, which works just for you? The code for your
main instance? And if somebody want to run his own instance, let him
maintain the differences.
This will have the benefit, that people will be able to browse the code
and contribute with fixes/RFE (yet without testing), but you can finalize
it yourself as you did with my XLIFF contribution.
And you will be open-source company (which I believe you are in heart).
And Fedora will be able to continue Transifex. Otherwise - I'm afraid - the
force to use open-source solution will be too strong and migration to other
system will be inevitable. And that would be shame, because I still think
that Transifex has superior features.
Please reconsider this in your team.
Miroslav Suchy, RHCE, RHCDS
Red Hat, Senior Software Engineer, #brno, #devexp, #fedora-buildsys
infrastructure mailing list
Founder & CEO, Transifex