Thiago, I guess we need to wait on what you and the other in charge decide how to go with private branches and general structure of the repository. Just ping us when you think we can get started though I guess any discussion on the subject will happen in this list right?
On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 2:34 PM, Riccardo Iaconelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > A fork button (ala github) on each repo's main page to create the private > version of it would be extremely extremely cool. =) > As Johan said, those features are already in though caching needs to be implemented. The word "fork" has a pretty bad connotation in the FOSS world, it generally starts with a big disagreement between developers who end up forking the project which produce a lot of drama (think gcc/egg, emacs/xemacs, compiz/beryl). This is why some people came up with the expression "friendly fork" (eg. http://gaim-vv.sourceforge.net/) because forks per se are often considered evil :) When you're using git, you're almost constantly forking but in a friendly way (with the intention to keep up to date with upstream and merge or rebase later), I guess this is why Linus came up with "git clone" because "git fork" would sound bad (or scary :) and "git friendly fork" would sound weird :) Fork also sounds centralized while clone sounds more decentralized IMO. _______________________________________________ Kde-scm-interest mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-scm-interest
