WE're talking about wordpress, not github.
kc
On 2/20/13 9:56 AM, Johnston, Leslie wrote:
It's technically breaking GitHub's terms of service to have multiple
individuals sharing a single account.
Leslie
-----Original Message-----
From: Code for Libraries [mailto:CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of
Karen Coyle
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2013 12:07 PM
To: CODE4LIB@LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] GitHub Myths (was thanks and poetry)
Sure. Although the question was more: how can we make it easy to have a
bunch of accounts? Or should we have a c4l account that we share (and
monitor for spam)? I think anything wysiwyg-y and familiar (wordpress
certainly meets those criteria) would be fine. There does seem to be a
lot of familiarity with Wordpress in the group.
kc
On 2/20/13 8:45 AM, Ethan Gruber wrote:
Wordpress?
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Karen Coyle <li...@kcoyle.net>
wrote:
Shaun, you cannot decide whether github is a barrier to entry FOR ME
(or anyone else), any more than you can decide whether or not my
foot hurts.
I'm telling you github is NOT what I want to use. Period.
I'm actually thinking that a blog format would be nice. It could be
pretty (poetry and beauty go together). Poems tend to be short, so
they'd make a nice blog post. They could appear in the Planet blog
roll. They could be coded by author and topic. There could be
comments! Even poems as comments!
The only down-side is managing users. Anyone have ideas on that?
kc
On 2/20/13 8:20 AM, Shaun Ellis wrote:
(As a general rule, for every programmer who prefers tool A, and
says that everybody should use it, there’s a programmer who
disparages tool A, and advocates tool B. So take what we say with
a
grain of salt!)
It doesn't matter what tools you use, as long as you and your team
are able to participate easily, if you want to. But if you want to
attract
contributions from a given development community, then choices
should be balanced between the preferences of that community and
what best serve the project.
From what I've been hearing, I think there is a lot of confusion
about GitHub. Heck, I am constantly learning about new GitHub
features, APIs, and best practices myself. But I find it to be an
incredibly powerful platform for moving open source, distributed
software development forward.
I am not telling anyone to use GitHub if they don't want to, but
I
want to dispel a few myths I've heard recently:
------------
* Myth #1 : GitHub creates a barrier to entry.
* "To contribute to a project on GitHub, you need to use the
command-line. It's not for non-coders."
GitHub != git. While GitHub was initially built for publishing and
sharing code via integration with git, all GitHub functionality can
be performed directly through the web gui. In fact, GitHub can
even
be used as your sole coding environment. There are other tools in
the "eco-system"
that allow non-coders to contribute documentation, issue reporting,
and more to a project.
------------
* Myth #2 : GitHub is for sharing/publishing code.
* "I would be fun to have a wiki for more durable poetry (github
unfortunately would be a barrier to many)."
GitHub can be used to collaborate on and publish other types of
content as well. For example, GitHub has a great wiki component*
(as well as a website component). In a number of ways, has less of
a "barrier to entry"
than our Code4Lib wiki.
While the path of least resistance requires a "repository" to have
a
wiki, public repos cost nothing and can consist of a simple
"README" file.
The wiki can be locked down to a team, or it can be writable by
anyone with a github account. You don't need to do anything via
command-line, don't need to understand "git-flow", and you don't
even need to learn wiki markup to write content. All you need is an
account and something to say, just like any wiki. Log in, go to the
anti-harassment policy wiki, and see for yourself:
https://github.com/code4lib/**antiharassment-
policy/wiki<https://git
hub.com/code4lib/antiharassment-policy/wiki>
* The github wiki even has an API (via Gollum) that you can use to
retrieve raw or formatted wiki content, write new content, and
collect various meta data about the wiki as a whole:
https://github.com/code4lib/**antiharassment-
policy/wiki/_**access<h
ttps://github.com/code4lib/antiharassment-policy/wiki/_access>
------------
* Myth #3 : GitHub is person-centric.
"(And as a further aside, there’s plenty to dislike about github
as
well, from it’s person-centric view of projects (rather than
team-centric)..."
Untrue. GitHub is very team centered when using organizational
accounts, which formalize authorization controls for projects,
among other things:
https://github.com/blog/674-**introducing-
organizations<https://gith
ub.com/blog/674-introducing-organizations>
------------
* Myth #4 : GitHub is monopolizing open source software
development.
"... to its unfortunate centralizing of so much free/open source
software on one platform.)"
Convergence is not always a bad thing. GitHub provides a great,
free
service with lots of helpful collaboration tools beyond version
control.
It's natural that people would flock there, despite having lots
of
other options.
------------
-Shaun
On 2/19/13 5:35 PM, Erik Hetzner wrote:
At Sat, 16 Feb 2013 06:42:04 -0800, Karen Coyle wrote:
gitHub may have excellent startup documentation, but that startup
documentation describes git in programming terms mainly using *nx
commands. If you have never had to use a version control system
(e.g. if you do not write code, especially in a shared
environment), "clone"
"push" "pull" are very poorly described. The documentation is all
in terms of *nx commands. Honestly, anything where this is in the
documentation:
On Windows systems, Git looks for the |.gitconfig| file in the
|$HOME| directory (|%USERPROFILE%| in Windows’ environment),
which
is
|C:\Documents and Settings\$USER| or |C:\Users\$USER| for most
|people,
depending on version (|$USER| is |%USERNAME%| in Windows’
environment).
is not going to work for anyone who doesn't work in Windows at
the
command line.
No, git is NOT for non-coders.
For what it’s worth, this programmer finds git’s interface pretty
terrible. I prefer mercurial (hg), but I don’t know if it’s any
better for people who aren’t familar with a command line.
http://mercurial.selenic.com/**guide/<http://mercurial.selenic.com/
guide/>
(As a general rule, for every programmer who prefers tool A, and
says that everybody should use it, there’s a programmer who
disparages tool A, and advocates tool B. So take what we say with
a
grain of salt!)
(And as a further aside, there’s plenty to dislike about github as
well, from it’s person-centric view of projects (rather than
team-centric) to its unfortunate centralizing of so much free/open
source software on one platform.)
best, Erik
Sent from my free software system <http://fsf.org/>.
--
Karen Coyle
kco...@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet
--
Karen Coyle
kco...@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet
--
Karen Coyle
kco...@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet
