Kevin Lyda wrote:
On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 10:45 PM, Armin K. <[email protected]> wrote:
Given that I'm the only contributor at the moment, with Chris jumping in
to help on some occassions, I find it easier to use git than svn,
especially for managing a big number of small patches and doing merges
(which I won't be able since I'll be moving only the systemd branch).
Does anyone object on that? I know it would be a downside that a more or
less official project is being hosted somewhere else, but I don't recall
that LFS server hosts any git repositories, so github is my best bet.
In case nobody objects, current editors can either send me their public
ssh key for commit access or send pull requests or git formatted patches
(the latter two apply for everyone else).
It's a lot easier to do pull requests and to track development via
github than it is to do so from the current system. Also better
branching allows for a wider set of experiments. I'd vote yes.
We tried early this year to export the svn history to git but were
unsuccessful. I'm not ready to throw away that history.
Since there are relatively few changes to LFS and only a small number of
committers, subversion works fine.
For instance I'd be interested in switching the book over to markdown
from docbook which I think would make it more accessible.
We have 15 years of experience tweaking Docbook based files to do
several tasks. We do a lot more maintenance work behind the scenes with
the XML files than just render HTML.
Since I've never heard of markdown, I don't see how it would make it
more accessible.
-- Bruce
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
