Sebastian Kayser wrote:
Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski wrote on 28.08.2009 13:09:
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 9:16 AM, Peter FELECAN<[email protected]> wrote:
"Maciej (Matchek) Blizinski" <[email protected]> writes:
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 6:50 PM, Dagobert Michelsen<[email protected]> wrote:
Yes:
<https://www.ohloh.net/p/GAR/enlistments>
Why don't we have two enlistments (opencsw + gar) and only one project
at ohloh? It's only one project after all. Just because two
repositories are used, doesn't make it two projects. Sebastian, what
do you think about adding the gar repository enlistment to the
opencsw ohloh project?
IMHO there are 2 projects, certainly related but 2 in number.
GAR might be considered a separate software project, but the builds
themselves are code using GAR, they aren't GAR itself. Don't the
builds seem belong to the OpenCSW project rather than GAR?
I felt almost the same, Dago has/had reasons for not mixing the sf.net
projects (on ohloh). Maybe we can call a vote ;) +1 *SCNR*
+1
Kidding aside, I would be in favor of at least adding the gar.sf.net
pkg/ subtree to the OpenCSW ohloh project - most of the CSW work a
maintainer does is going on there.
Given ohloh is mostly about marketing and statistics I think it make a
lot of sense to include GAR in the ohloh opencsw project as it will be a
quite accurate measurement of those that's using Subversion.
--
Trygve
_______________________________________________
maintainers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
