Robbie Morrison <robbie <at> actrix.co.nz> writes: > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/help-glpk/2010-12/threads.html#00039 > > A public repository would encourage contributions. > But it would also require some policy on commit > access and some additional workload for monitoring > the various changes.
Commit access probably doesn't need to be formalized, at least for a while. In most projects, people submit patches to be applied by core group (right now just Andrew, I would guess); often the patch sits in a bug database and gets worked over collectively. After a longish probationary period the core group decides to give consistent contributors commit access (informally, even on large projects, or with a simple +/- vote). But projects work fine even if most contributors don't have commit and just submit patches. > There is a slowly growing expectation that > software projects should be easy to contribute to. Yeah, it works better that way -- more free labor. Though it does mean patches have to be evaluated. > In terms of systems, 'git' would seem a reasonable > choice. I understand it has become more Windows > friendly over time. If you are geek enough to make math models and use the command line, git should be easy on any system. > GNU Savannah would, I guess, be the obvious > code host: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Savannah Yep. I think they default to Mercurial, which is OK too. _______________________________________________ Help-glpk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-glpk
