Wedge

Well, first of all an organization is a given. It ensures that we don't have ego issues (even if unlikely in the first place) regarding whose account is hosting Wedge. It smells of seriousness, too. And we can both be 'admins' for the organization, of course. We can both leave and give away the organization to someone else, etc, etc. It's not linked to us.
As for minor components, this is where I'm unsure where to go: either an organization repo, or my own repo. I guess I'll make a decision when time comes...

I'm not even excited about github. But I'm considering that since most people who do open source dev are on github, it's more likely we'll draw attention from external devs if we're on it rather than bitbucket (mercurial...) or others.
I simply just feel silly with all the options git has. I'm concerned that I might actually work much slower than usual from the moment I switch to git, because it'll be annoying for me to commit anything...
If I could only find a good reason not to use github...It's probably more than me ;)Yup... It'd be less intrusive. That's the point.
Actually, I didn't even remember there was a popup system for that. I always disable it...

Oh, speaking of popups, please have a look at the current version. I added a background dimming for popups. This is usually something I detest (it was a feature in Highslide, and I never even gave the option to enable it...), but somehow it grew on me when I tried to implement it in reqWin 'just for fun'. It's currently enabled with an asModal boolean, so it's disabled by default, but I enabled it by default on wedge.org so that you can have a look and tell me what you think.
The original idea was that we could turn some (if not all) alert calls into modal popups and the background dimming would be a visual clue that it requires an action and clicking elsewhere won't just close the popup.
What do you think...?
Plus, the 'Close the window' link is the perfect place to show buttons ;)

Oh, and the background dimming also gives a hint that your click 'did' something when we're loading the contents through Ajax... On my dev platform it's immediate, but here it can take a couple of seconds, so it's nice to have some feedback.

It looks really nice :)The PM notification is one of the more sucky things in SMF, it's just a bare JS alert().It uses silly[1] non-linear non-numbered revisions. That enough for you? :niark:That's generally true but honestly I'm not bothered myself about whether it's on Github or not. I find it tends to get in my way when trying to do anything.For minor components you probably would be better served with your own repo, e.g. the selectbox.

1.	I still find it silly even though I can make several good arguments that it isn't silly.

Yep! Thus, I'm unsure whether to keep it to the future modal mode or just use it always...
In the case of a help popup, it's probably best to have the best possible visibility for anything underneath it. OTOH I made the dimming relatively subtle (20% IIRC), so it's not that big a deal.
I played a lot with css3 transitions to make it work, and then gave up and did it in jQuery with a simple fadeIn(), ah ah... Silly me. It's similar in performance, maybe a tad jerkier in Safari. Who cares.Ah, that was it...
And because alerts came up every time my tabs reloaded, if I left my browser and relaunched it later, it would have plenty of tabs that needed a button to be clicked to get control back... Meh!Yeah, it's enough, as it was my #1 argument against it, but then I registered over there to get the hang of it, and now I have even more to say about it and what I don't like... For instance, if they're so keen to make it into a social network, why the hell don't they allow PMs and/or e-mailing users through some form...? Why do they, on the contrary, show signed-off-by e-mails in plain view? (They even link them!)
Why is the interface so incredibly hard to decipher? It has too much information, and too simple a color scheme to spot the right bits -- it's basically gray on grey... Or gray on grey, depends on your taste.Your repo supports Mercurial, and custom domains... So it's not like we couldn't use Mercurial and host it publicly on dev.wedge.org or something.
Or just use SVN... :P But I'm sure that at the very least, hg would be more realistic to entice users into participating. I don't know.Alrighty.

I can run private Git repos on RepositoryHosting too so that's not a big deal, just that Github is the go-to place. Except that the UI is entirely confusing and the whole thing makes me not want to use it.

Did you need another reason not to use Github?

I just want to ensure a successful future to Wedge. That really is the only reason to consider github...

My personal preference is actually Google Code, after having tried both solutions. It's very easy to understand for newbies, has SVN access and is fairly fully featured for more savvy devs.

But GC doesn't have the one thing I like in git: committing to your own repo (either local or remote) and then automatically submitting a patch for maintainers to review.
Basically -- if SVN had that capability, I'd stay with it for a wide-scale development. I don't know if hg has it though... I suppose it does?

I believe hg might have that, I'm not so sure about exactly what it can or can't do.

Not trying to be biased but Hg has nothing over Git, AFAIK it can do pull requests like the way git does but it is not better and most likely worse. Plus in all honesty github is perhaps the best repository hosting option out there ATM. Google code hardly has anything like fork support or pull request (Google itself doesn't use it for Android), source forge is old news, bit bucket/repository hosting have much less features than github (AFAIK) plus a much smaller user base.

Except ease of use maybe..? Why would people still use hg over git then..? (Except for the silly name being a turnoff?)That it is 'worse' is not a problem to me.
I would even prefer git+bitbucket (or git+gc) at this point. I just don't like github as a website... What do you know, I'm a design and UX lover. I just don't think github is very 'practical' when it comes to being a collaboration tool AND a social network.
Do you know how to remove a notification from my own timeline? (you know, the one that says Nawe has forked blueprint-css, when I never did in the first place, and removed said fork anyway...)
If you can't, then it's not a social network, it's just a fucked up mess of bugs.
bitbucket has a more readable UI, has private repos (so it doesn't smell like "we'll shove openness down your throat, whether you like it or not!!!!!!!!!1"), and generally I tend to say "fuck" to things that people tell me to join ONLY because they're popular. Hey, I've got news for you: SMF doesn't get contributions from anyone else than the usual suspects. I'm sure that if SMF were to be hosted on GC or BB, it'd get the same usual suspects to register over there, and contribute just the same.
Now, GC and BB both support git so it's not even an issue with what you chose to go with...

There are so many reasons (both good and bad, both rooted or unrealistic) for which I don't like github, it'd just feel like a disaster to go with it in the end. Give me a new readable design for it, give me sequential commit numbers (we're talking about something that's doable), give me tools to contact people (PM or email or whatever), give me tools to control my own page (like deleting entries or whatever), give me a good tutorial to make the transition from svn less painful, *AND* then I'll consider github.
Because, REALLY, "3 million repos" is the fucking worst reason to join it. Just like "It has plenty of members" was the worst possible reason to join Facebook. How many active repos/members in both of these, eh? Certainly a lot, but I'll take Google+ and Google Code anytime as better replacements, because they know something about UX design. And I don't even LIKE Google!It supports forking, and pull requests can be done by opening an issue... Granted, it's not terribly functional, but to me it's more functional than the messed up fuck that is github's designer team.
Are they self-taught or what? Well, maybe someone should give them a course or something... They've improved a bit since last year, but they still suck hard. For instance, when will they stop using stupid animations for transitions between pages? It's certainly a lot of fun to them, but as a professional user I don't want animations, I want functionality. And these animations get in the way.I don't think it'd be suitable for very large projects, either. But even with BB at least the UI makes sense to me, and doesn't try to catch me into some social crap... I haven't tested it yet (much), but from what I see, it's not as annoying.I always hated sourceforge, the UI is better than github but it's always been so incredibly slow... Performance is the #1 factor in choosing a website.Which really, really isn't a problem with me...
I don't know why github is popular. Maybe it's the animations that won most of the userbase. Maybe they spent a lot of money trying to get everyone in the bay area to use it or something, and then it naturally spread from there. Maybe the guys who run it are absolutely charming. Or maybe it's just the better tool and I'm too old for this shit. I don't know.

What I do know, though, is that I need some pretty good reason to use github, after all the mess I've been witnessing, and "it's popular" is SO NOT a good reason for me to do that... Because popularity is the first thing you lose when you start making mistakes, and github might very well end up being replaced with a superior system. One day. And then everyone will laugh at github users for still being on that piece of crap etc etc...
Been there done that ;)

I don't like git. I just can't wrap my head around it.