On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 09:05:17PM -0400, Julien Rioux wrote: > On 13/03/2012 8:13 PM, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > >But why? > > > >This is the perfect case for a separate repo. > > > > [...] > > > >| Assuming that the pristinity of the lyx repo as a whole is so > >| important that we cannot allow trusted developers to create branches, > >| then maybe such branches can be allowed in the lyx-staging repo? Can > >| we have branches in this one, please? > > > >That would be better, but I do not understand why you couldn't have this > >in your own repo. > > > > And I don't understand why we couldn't have branches in our repo. > I want it simple, and I want it centralized. It's nice to allow > private new repos to developers, thank you for that, but it seems > overkill to require their use.
Additional repos are really easy to handle with git remotes. I'd even argue you won't really notice it. > I honestly cannot be bothered at the moment to setup remote > repositories to fetch someone else's latest feature branch, let alone > setup my own copy of the repo on the server. You are ready to write a 20-line-mail because you can't be bothered to write a single 'git remote add <name> git://...' line when you need it? This does not make much sense to me. > I'm looking for a central place to have access and contribute to the > latest LyX development. (I'm also looking for a tool that is stupid > easy to use.) I hope that if it's not lyx.git, then please let > lyx-staging.git be this central place. Then it would be the main LyX > repo in my mind. > > Anyway, that's just me. I'm curious to hear what others have to say. There is no need to clutter The LyX Sources with work-in-progress branches and lots of needless merges. It's not only ugly, but also impacts stuff like 'git bisect'. Some things are simply better kept linear... You want to keep it simple. Using git remotes _is_ simple. Andre'
