Click on the admin tab of your repository, and under "Repository
Collaborators" you can add as many contributors as you want.

-Nick

On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 1:34 PM, Illydth <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> To whom it may concern,
>
> First, I'm sorry for likely posting a duplicate question.  I did try
> searching but keywords being what they may, it turned up nothing.  I'm
> happy to get a simple link to a post that explains the issues.
>
> I am an open source developer using GitHub as my project GIT
> Repository.  Recently I have had interest by a couple other developers
> in assisting me with the code on the project.  I am somewhat unclear
> as to what the procedure for a collaborative code base (i.e. a single
> code base being pushed to by multiple developers (not necessarily a
> single repository) ) would be.
>
> From what I am reading the suggested method seems to be to buy a paid
> account and then set people up as collaborators on the project.  This
> doesn't make much sense to my situation since this is an open source
> development and as such the intent is not to be paying for
> resources.
>
> While I understand business models and the need to be able to pay for
> the site you have set up, I am confused that such a basic requirement
> of an open source project (allowing more than one person to modify the
> code) requires the development staff to shell out money they're not
> recouping in costs.  Perhaps I am not seeing the bigger picture or I'm
> entirely mis-informed.
>
> I notice in other documentation that there is a multiple repository /
> multiple user methodology discussed but there seems to be a big TOS
> warning that indicates that doing this in some way (though it is not
> spelled out in the slightest) might end up violating a TOS for
> GitHub.
>
> So I guess my question is does GitHub inherently support (in some way)
> having multiple developers working on the same project for no cost?  I
> understand that I can have a developer create his or her own free
> account, branch the code from my project and then I can setup a remote
> tracking branch in my local development GIT repository for his
> branches by cloning from his source (at which point one developer
> becomes the "master" merger) but I cannot seem to determine whether
> this is the "TOS Violation" being talked about because it gets around
> the need to purchase a paid for account, or if this is an expected/
> understood/supported method to have multiple developers collaborating
> on a single project.  However, browsing the terms of service I cannot
> find anywhere where this is mentioned.
>
> Another method would seem to be to have all of my developers generate
> SSH keys and I add them to my profile...thus allowing each of them to
> push to the repository, but this method DOES look like it might break
> the TOS's "one user/one account" policy...even if none of the
> developers are actually "logging in" to my GitHub account.
>
> At the end of the day if GitHub does not or is unwilling to support
> more than one developer touching the source without paying a monthly
> fee I cannot see it as meeting the needs of the vast majority of the
> open source community since the vast majority of the projects are
> maintained open source to get around the need to either charge for or
> pay out for services.
>
> Please do not take this as a post intending to flame or otherwise
> denigrate your service.  It is a top quality website and a top quality
> code repository and I would very much like to continue using it for my
> project.
>
> Any assistance I could get, even "No, sorry, that's what keeps us in
> business" would be most appreciated.
>
> --Douglas Wagner
> Illydth - WoW Raid Manager
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to