X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Original-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=tB1oGrYbHMEDakrBHuEeuesBgpJxOuIDfrnUC9ljpZo=; b=xziJLMRMn0+kjcyePWHKu72rxSCp8VXsLUpF6oXUtP06vhQv3qkjmh5er2dadjAqbU 5gu+wlDar4tFr7HriEZWeWFjkswqI14zfyFvFXvDHoxbXcX/PgHTYi79KrZ4S48ht9Kf eSK1x9bE321WFL1sE5qA1n6Z8YMeQwhTcuiPxhPz4GwvIZ1KXReVmaSGYezTrZRdpHnX 77YjsCIc3dBnUuVCqpv0gXcrtdhZiw+NIw45xhSMyEykid6sjH01SGAjU5EcbxrUT64H gIYlQVp8TZLshOrqQpbZ4ILpQiXIN/bl2kMDcj/CiqB4EFhsCZVTmhknq3rVic3/Bbfn 0BEA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.30.73 with SMTP id q9mr14032485lah.31.1441130236131; Tue, 01 Sep 2015 10:57:16 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <201509011718.t81HIR58018562@envy.delorie.com> References: <55E5A6BA DOT 4030606 AT jump-ing DOT de> <201509011657 DOT t81Gve9d017777 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <201509011718 DOT t81HIR58018562 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 13:57:16 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [geda-user] back annotation - phase 2, call for contributors From: "Evan Foss (evanfoss AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 1:18 PM, DJ Delorie wrote: > >> For me, the important quesiton is whether the changes put in such a >> branch gets into the next release - or is left in a feature branch >> to bit rot. > > Changes put in a separate repo will surely not get into any release, > unless they make it to the main repo first. What ends up in the next > release is up to the people willing to put in the work to make a > release. > > Using the main repo for side projects at least keeps all the work in > one place that everyone knows about, and thus less likely to be lost > in the shuffle. > >> So what do you, gschem maintainers, think about the gschem-related points >> of my proposal? > > For the record, I don't consider myself a gschem maintainer. For > not-pcb I just keep the server running. Do we even have a gschem maintainer? -- Home http://evanfoss.googlepages.com/ Work http://forge.abcd.harvard.edu/gf/project/epl_engineering/wiki/