On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 6:13 AM, Michael Haggerty <mhag...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> But my main point is that I think it would be easier to phase out
> contrib/ if there were a good alternate way of providing visibility to
> "satellite" projects.  The relevant Git wiki page [1] is the most likely
> candidate, but it is a bit overwhelming due to its size, it has fallen
> into disuse because it was broken for such a long time, and it is not
> prominently linked to from git-scm.com.  If it were curated a bit, it
> would help users find the best ancillary tools quickly.  Perhaps ranking
> the tools based on the results of the Git user surveys would help bring
> the most popular to the top of each category.

One idea here could be to mirror what the libgit2 project [1] (and many
others) are doing on GitHub. Use the organization unit [2] as an umbrella
for the contrib projects. If necessary, put a pretty web-page on top [3].

Of course you don't have to tie it to GitHub, but they do have some nice
mechanisms for showing off popularity (stars and forks).

I heard that clojure/contrib [4] went through a big clean-up recently,
although I'm not sure if there was an equivalent reasoning behind it. But
their guide-lines on what should go into contrib may have some good
ideas [5].

[1] https://github.com/libgit2
[2] https://github.com/git
[3] http://libgit2.github.com/
[4] http://dev.clojure.org/display/design/Where+Did+Clojure.Contrib+Go
[5] http://dev.clojure.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=5767464
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to