Hi Peter, On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 1:12 AM, Peter Ansell <[email protected]> wrote: > > Those guidelines look great to me, especially the suggestion about the > branch name including the Jira issue, which I have found very useful > in all of my git-based projects. In the RDF/HDT case, and possibly in > the GeoSPARQL case, the contributed code could be in the form of a new > module, so there won't be much interference with the rest of the > codebase during that time. However, it is still useful to regularly > merge the "develop" branch into each of the branches to keep up to > date and reduce the number of merge conflicts occurring near the end > when the students will be rushing to complete the project.
Great you like it, Peter :-) I expect less merge conflicts, nevertheless it's a more concrete library; with the GeoSPARQL project that workflow is much more important. I've just have one concern about the documentation. Last year I had formatting issues bringing that documentation into the wiki (MoinMoin syntax is not markdown, unfortunately). Do you think is better to do it directly in the wiki? I'd love to hear comments from our students, after all you're the ones who need to follow that proposed methodology. Cheers, -- Sergio Fernández Partner Technology Manager Redlink GmbH m: +43 6602747925 e: [email protected] w: http://redlink.co
