Am 20.12.2013 16:05, schrieb David Chisnall: > - svn or git views of the repo, so developers can use either
That's possible with pure SVN repos, too. git-svn will check out a SVN repo just fine and you can work with it as if it were a Git repo. > - An easy way for people to branch / submit patches Actually, you can neither and I consider this to be the weakest point of Github. You can only fork and this forked repo is invisible from the originating repo. Also, sending patches is extremely awkward, because attaching files to bug reports is straight out not possible. You have to fork, clone the fork again (or fuss with git remote), move patches over there, too, push back to Github, then send a pull request. That done the maintainer has to git-remote-add the fork to pick over (or merge) the patch. This "merge" button on the web page is pointless, because it doesn't allow to review the patch. Not to mention that merging is a bit old fashioned when using Git, cherry-picking and rebasing opens new horizons. I'm writing this as one who hosts three active projects on Github. If you can deal with the disallowance of patch/file uploads (and the resulting lack of patch contributions), Github is fine. It's indeed the least sucking one and very visible. Markus -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dipl. Ing. (FH) Markus Hitter http://www.reprap-diy.com/ http://www.jump-ing.de/ _______________________________________________ Discuss-gnustep mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep
