On Wed, January 18, 2017 03:51, W. Trevor King wrote: Trevor,
thank you for your thoughts on this: couple of /follow-on/ reinforcement/ comments. As I stated, one of the reason for not floating this within the shell-extras 'effort" was that one or two of the issues clearly have liitle to do with that speficic effort, though, as you point out, there is a good deal, not least moving the existing shell-extras master repo into one that utilises the new template, that the shell-extras maintainers need to make a call on, however, when I looked at the main repo, it didn't appear to have had many updates of late and so I emaled Christina directly when initially approaching Greg. As to trying to make the underlying changes within the existing shell-extras repo, I can't say that I can see how I'd fork a repo of "old templated" existing content that would then follow the use patterns with the new template, and associated lesson repos, not least because the instructions for creating lessons with the new template make specific mention of the fact that the methodology chosen was one that had to be taken because the "old way" didn't allow for the desired direction that the new "two-repo", "content + template" approach took. I'd be happy to hear any thoughts on doing that, especially if it's been done before. Clearly, I've started out with the assumption that shell-extras content would end up using the same lesson template as the rest of the SWC content, so that would be a good place to start from. If, of course, it's easier for me to simply start a new lesson template PR that only has the lesson style as an upstream repo, whilst the shell-extras maintainers decide how to port their existing content, at which point I could easily meld their decisions into my PRs, then I'll happily do that. From your suggestions, it does sound as though I need to create a generic lesson using the new lesson template anyway, so that a pull request for adopting the use of a "site.index" variable, so as to faciliate a full offline capability, gets a wider hearing. Thanks again for carrying on the discussion, Kevin _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.software-carpentry.org/listinfo/discuss
