On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 06:01:30PM +0200, Francisco Vila wrote: > 2010/4/17 Graham Percival <[email protected]>: > > We had a week without doc work due to constantly-changing > > repositories. If you weren't active during that week, then you > > wouldn't have noticed it. > > I can not agree; everyone had to start a fresh repo, having been active or > not.
Yes, but some people had to start 3 or 4 fresh repo, and there was confusion about whether patches applies to repo #2 would appear in repo #3 or #4, etc. When repo #3 appeared without material that I'd pushed for a new doc committer who worked on repo #2, I told the doc editors to take a holiday for a week because it was too confusing and disheartening for contributors new to git. > You are too much concerned about stats these days, IMO. Judge by > yourself, http://paconet.org/lilypond-statistics/ [updated] I don't care about stats. I care about the morale of new contributors. I care about recruiting moderate-to-advanced users to help explain concepts to doc editors. The whole git repo switching occurred two days after I asked for volunteers to help with the docs. But then, after a few days, I had to tell them all to wait a week. People like to see immediate effect of their aid. They didn't get that. Scarce wonder that nothing ended up happening from that request. And to avoid being the boy that cried wolf, I'll have to wait a month before making the same request again. So if the rebase is going to cause another round of git repositories, I'd like it done sooner rather than later. If not, then there's no problem. Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
