On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 11:21:40AM +0800, Tony Anderson wrote: > Hi James, Walter > > I reviewed the 71 activities for which I created a repository in > github/ sugarlabs. > > Of these 47 are not duplicates to repositories on git.sugalabs.org.
But you omit repositories in other than git.sugarlabs.org? For instance, Implode-17 has activity.info file with correct repository value, yet you had created one for it? Activities may have no repositories, a repository on git.sugarlabs.org, a repository on laptop.org, a repository held by an individual, or a repository on http://github.com/sugarlabs For some activities, the repository on http://github.com/sugarlabs is a clone of a master repository somewhere else. > My understanding from the community is that activity repositoies on > git.sugarlabs.org should be considered the 'master' copy and ported > to github, Not if there is a more recent repository than git.sugarlabs.org > James has raised the point that adding some 600 repositories to > github/ sugarlabs makes reviewing the repositories more difficult. No, I didn't say that. > I would advocate Ignacio's idea that we have a > github/sugaractivitiies which would leave the sugarlabs repositories > for Sugar. I've stated why I think that is bad. > In the meantime, I plan to do nothing more on this project until > there is a clear direction from the community on how it is to be > done. > > My goal is to get repositories on github corresponding to each > activity in ASLO so that we can eliminate the 'developer web', I don't agree with this goal. If there was any consultation on this goal; those who make the most commits should have the most say. ;-) -- James Cameron http://quozl.netrek.org/ _______________________________________________ Sugar-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
