On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 1:51 AM, trans<[email protected]> wrote: > I'm sorry but the Pages feature is just god awful annoying. These are > my issues with it: > > 1) Conceptually branches are intended for copies of one's project to > be worked on, not a wholly different set of files.
You should let the Git project know. They're unaware and do something similar to gh-pages. http://github.com/git/git/tree/html > 2) It is customary to keep one's website files is a subdirectory or > one's project. It was also customary to branch rarely in Subversion. But now we have Git. > 3) Per custom, my site pages are already there, in the subdirectory. > So why not just serve them up? Why waste storage space by storing > another copy of them in a separate branch? Luckily if the files are the same, no space is wasted. > 4) Whenever one has to do something mind-numbing like <a href="http:// > github.com/drnic/sake-tasks/blob/ > 3152ac2eca99b97fa3bd4a2951a52064d7bd961c/github/pages/ > migrate_website.sake">this</a> in order to get something to work as > one would expect, then you know there's room for improvement. I agree. Keeping your site in a gh-pages branch would eliminate the need for this task. > I'm not asking that you get rid of the whole gh-pages branch thing -- > clearly some people want it that way, but perhaps you could offer the > subdirectory way as an alternative? Ideally have a property to specify > which directory or branch, to find site pages. We'll put it on the list. Thanks, -- Chris Wanstrath http://github.com/defunkt --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GitHub" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/github?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
