Mail Archives: geda-user/2014/04/16/21:17:55
> wanted to clarify that requesting write access to the main repo is
> absolutely not a neccessity for doing pcb development.
Sure, but saying "you don't have to ask for write access" is different
than promoting a "don't use in the main repo" strategy.
> Funny you should write that. :) It is in fact impossible NOT to make
> a copy of a git repository if you want to actually work with it.
I know how git works. I have to use it daily. I still hate it.
> > It would be much easier to find all gEDA-related
> > development, for example, if it happened in the gEDA repository.
>
> A DVCS such as git allows powerful workflows where development is
> very conveniently structured.
I have to use git a lot, and I hate it, because it makes it very
difficult for me to do my daily job. Please use the word "powerful"
more carefully ;-)
> Especially a project such as integrating freerouter into pcb would
> do well living in its own branch somewhere,
I see no reason why this is the case, nor have you offered any such
reason. If more than one person is working on a project, there needs
to be coordination and centralization *somehow* else they're really
working on separate projects.
> It's a good thing to publish ongoing work as early as possible, it
> translates to a more efficient development effort, but on the other
> hand, early work doesn't neccessarily belong in the primary project
> repository, even if it has a branch of its own.
This does not follow. We have plenty of temporary branches in the
main git repo.
> Publishing the commits on one hand solicits review, but at the same
> time it is also already enough for project maintainers to include the
> proposed commits into the project - and trivially so using git fetch,
> cherry-pick and am, if the commits are published using git's own
> tools.
Please use the word "trivially" more carefully. Another sore spot
between me and git.
> Of course you are right that it's nice to make ongoing work easily
> available, but the point with a DVCS is that it does not dictate
> *how* that happens, and using the primary repo is only one of several
> useful ways.
Of course. I just don't want to have people think they *can't* use
the repo because so many people are promoting "just fork a clone and
publish it elsewhere!". It sends the wrong message. We want people
to join the project, not be sent away from it.
- Raw text -