The people behind the Foundation should think about moving to Github Pages so everyone could suggest changes by simple pull requests. The same applies to the development of FPC/Lazarus even if I know that some people don't like Github but it's the #1 like Google is for searching the web. If you want to attract new people go to the place where they are. 
I mean, sure you can host your own Gitee/Gitlab instance but if the amount of volunteers is limited and the few don't even keep pace with updating/installing asked plug-ins or features why running another software?
Presence on GitHub is certainly a marketing argument. In which way it will manifest itself, is however a good question....
In any case, despite the critical questions that follow below, creating a (yet another) github mirror, may help a little. So
if it can be done with little effort, then it definitely should be done.
Keep in mind, it has been looked into already. And there are steps (e.g. developers have scripts for certain tasks) in the development/release process that need heavy work to be change.
So changing the main repro is a big task (bigger than you would think)
* More Google hits?
Well there is an FPC mirror already:
https://github.com/graemeg/freepascalAnd 2 Lazarus mirrors. So google should have the hits for those already.
*New users to trust the project more easily?
I have a feeling that may be true for some people, despite it is absolutely illogical.
* Pull request easier for the developer than patches?
Well not for me.
I already work with git, on my local pc, and applying a patch and comparing it in git is as easy as looking at a pull request.
I should say that for me, the online interface to compare pullrequests is no good (So my feedback comes by mail, no annotations via the online interface). I always pull the requests to my local repro, and compare them locally.
So patch/pull requests, is the
exact same amount of work to me.
* More contributors?
I am not that sure... Yes at first glance I would think so too.
But people have reasoned for so many things (that they wanted to be done), with this and similar arguments. And not once has it happens. We had been promised huge amount of new users if we would only change the version to 1.0. We are at 2.0 now. Still waiting for the spike in new users (there have been new users, and maybe the rate has increased over time, but I did not see any increase correlated to the 1.0 date....
Keep in mind that writing the code, that you want to contribute is a lot more work and needs more knowledge and skills, than submitting a patch (or even submitting an entire copy of the modified file (which people have done, sigh))
And having the option of pull requests, does not change many other issues:
- You need to check first, if the feature/fix itself is acceptable (submitting codetools for whitespace
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whitespace_(programming_language), may be rejected, even if your code has the finest quality)
- Dealing with the forth an back, until the submission has the format/quality required
- Dealing with delays until someone has time to answer.
The "delay" issue, is unfortunately a big problem.
Even if you are lucky and a developer picks up your issue and takes care of it, that developer could take weeks to answer. I have been at both ends (being the developer and being the contributor, the latter with various projects).
But worse, because the projects have a flat team structure, there is no-one who will "force assign" patches to a team member. (the team members are all volunteers, they only do work that they volunteer to do). So sometimes a patch comes along, and everyone thinks: This does not fall into the area of the project which I am working on.
Then the patch may be unattended for very very long.
That is a massive and really bad problem. No patch should ever be left without a reply. But it does happen. And GitHub is not going to change it.
But we can actually test it.
I run a github mirror myself:
https://github.com/User4martin/lazarusOn this mirror, it is possible to make pull requests. However, the only person looking at those is me. So pull request for
anything that does not fall into my area will be closed without even a review.
Generally, if you have a pull request for SynEdit or the Debugger, then you can make it on this mirror. (You should check that the feature itself is acceptable, and that you are looking at the correct place to implement it... Those pre-conditions also apply).
So far I had one. Which started with patches, and only became pull-requests when I pointed to the possibility. So the contributor existed without need for github.
Recent
