gitlab migration

[Daniel Stone]

On Tue, 12 Jun 2018 at 22:36, James Cloos <cloos at jhcloos.com> wrote:
> >>>>> "DS" == Daniel Stone <daniel at fooishbar.org> writes:
> DS> No need to test; it's guaranteed to fail since we require Recaptcha
> DS> for login due to massive spam issues.
>
> Which is of course grossly unethical and malicious and should never be
> used by any site, under any circumstances.
>
> If some sort of captcha is ever desired, it always must be something
> which works with non-ecmacsipt, TUI browsers.
>
> A simple math question with a simple html text box for the answer is OK.
> Or a technical question specific to the given project.
>
> But never goog's malicious crap.

I assume that you're unaware of the levels of spam we've been dealing
with, including the number of times we've been blacklisted by major
mail providers, the extent to which search engines used to distrust
us, and the amount of admin time spent dealing with it.

Now you've got whatever it was out of your system, maybe you could
come back with some kind of actionable feedback, or a constructive
plan to address the genuine problems that we've been discussing both
here and at various conferences for the last two or three years which
have led to GitLab. Maybe you could venture a real suggestion for
dealing with spam which also works with noscript lynx or whatever;
ideally one which was better than our previous version which did
genuinely cause people issues. Or maybe you could go look at the CLI
client for GitLab I've already pointed to, and read the API
documentation. Or just continue the useless flames trying to enforce
your opinion as universal fact, every single line of which should
carry '[citation needed]'.