On Wed, 2015-12-16 at 14:34 +0100, katja wrote: > With the decentralization of Pd lib version control it is hard to > locate / identify upstream source repositories. Would it be feasible > and useful to generate (and regularly update) an overview of forks > based on http://git.puredata.info/cgit/, to be referenced from > http://puredata.info/docs/developer/GettingPdSource?
I believe it would be hard to maintain such an overview. Who has to maintain such a list? How can you control that people adhere to the standards? I would rather propose adding some mandatory meta information to deken uploads. A package that can be downloaded from puredata.info should at least contain the information which sources it was built from. Further, I think it is the duty of the maintainer of a fork to make clear what the origin of the fork is. If those two things are considered, we have transparency and identifying upstream should be feasible. Roman
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Pd-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
