On Nov 7, 2011, at 5:04 AM, Yawar Amin wrote: > > On 2011-11-07, at 04:54, Christian Stimming wrote: > >>> […] >> >> My suggestion is to move the main git repo also to a github one, and not >> maintaining our own source code server. My reasons for this is an easier >> administration of adding main commit access, and also a much easier handing >> over of the administration priviledges itself - which is currently "hard >> coded" to Derek as the root account owner on the gnucash box. >> >> If we decided to move not only to git, but also to github, we'd solve most >> of the build script integration issues: github offers the additional feature >> of accessing its git repos also by a svn client, see >> https://github.com/blog/966-improved-subversion-client-support > > Looks good: but if we use this setup, the main development branch in GitHub > has to be called ‘master’, because that’s what GitHub expects to find when > it’s looking for the branch to map to Subversion’s ‘trunk’ (see the last line > of the blog post).
We'd want to do that anyway, because git expects its main branch to be called master, as do most git users. Regards, John Ralls _______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
