> Obviously, GitX is no longer being developed. The question is what to do > about it: Pieter could include a reference that his fork is no longer > being maintained in the README file, for example.
Or Pieter could ask the community for volunteers to officially take over GitX, pick one, and make a public announcement, backed up by a statement at the top of his repo's README. > As to being "blessed", this is mostly a question of version-number and > Google PageRank, isn't it? Bluntly: No, I don't think it is. Open source projects thrive under conditions that make for good coordination. That's easiest when there's an official preferred version, with someone who is actively maintaining it -- even if that maintenance consists of nothing more than having an opinion about direction and handling pull requests. Letting a thousand forks bloom, for a long time, each wandering their own way, is not good for anyone, users or contributors. > I mean, if you manage to put up a decent > website which ranks above gitx.frim.nl (should not be that hard), you > are the blessed GitX, aren't you? GitX is not in the Mac App Store yet, > as far as I know, so you could be the first there as well! For the record, I have nothing to do with that particular fork. I am just a frustrated user that has tried out a handful of different GitX forks, all of which have their ups and downs. And I would contribute to GitX, if it weren't so hopelessly fragmented. And yes, one could grow to be the most popular GitX that way...but having a mutually recognized future GitX can be achieved more easily. This is something that we've heard from other folks on this mailing list over the months and years. I mainly wanted to give likely interested folks an opportunity to chime in on that discussion. As you have, which I appreciate, our disagreements notwithstanding. :) -josh
