[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

Re: Documentation

On 04/30/2016 09:04 PM, Howard Chu wrote:
The process of creating a patch with git is the same, whether we use github or not. I don't believe that's particularly meaningful. 
My thoughts exactly. Some 3-4 years ago. Then I've actually tried to run 
a project on github. It siginificanly lowers the contribution barrier. 
It is much easier to press "pull request" button than to bundle the 
patch in command-line, send it to the mailing list (subscribe there 
first), then wait for the maintainer, check all the time whether the 
patch was merged, ...

Github-like approach makes a big difference. I see it in midPoint (which 
I'm maintianing) and I see it in ConnId (where I'm regularly 
contributing). I also see how bad it is without github for several 
Apache projects that I watch closely. And I will probably never 
contribute to these (unless I really have to) because the overhead is so 
high.

To state that openly: I would probably never contribute to OpenLDAP 
documentation if I have to bundle a patch in a mail to a mailing list. 
I'm quite likely to contribute if there is a convenient "pull request" 
button or if it is maintained in a wiki.

We are running the midPoint project on github for several years. But I'm 
not afraid. I can still check all the code changes in any git tool I 
like. As a maintainer you do not need to rely on github. And if github 
would disappear at this very moment we will be running on a different 
site before the day is over. With no loss in the source code history. 
This is git, the migration is really trivial. So I believe that the 
benefits greatly outweigh the risks.

If you do not like github go for gitlab. You can even host that yourself.

--
Radovan Semancik
Software Architect
evolveum.com