My humble 2 cents: I am not a TiddlyWiki developer nor am I familiar with Git. My only contributions to TW so far are the Dutch and Spanish translations, or localizations if you whish. The language-files as well as ready-to-use translated empty TWs are stored in SVN too, up until now (also for other languages of course). They are in: http://svn.tiddlywiki.org/Trunk/association/locales/core/... (see also: http://trac.tiddlywiki.org/wiki/Translations ) Since I don't know Git I cannot compare it with SVN, and as such I don't have an opinion on which one is better for TW. The only thing I would like to ask is to not forget the translators, and the consequences for the way they can deliver their contributions. Thanks.
Ton van Rooijen. On 21 jan, 12:28, Paul Downey <[email protected]> wrote: > > I didn't say "discard". The svn repo would remain in place, with full > > history. Reviewing that history would require an extra step, but still > > be possible. > > I can live with freezing trac.tiddlywiki.org and svn.tiddlywiki.org > and starting with an empty list in github with only actionable tickets > open which get fixed quickly. Chris has demonstrated this approach > works well with TiddlySpace. > > > A driving force behind moving to github is to remove both the > > perception and reality of any Osmosoft priority over priorities. If > > you keep your own fork of TiddlyWiki on github, and manage it in a > > shareable way, then it becomes easy for your changes and fixes to be > > merged into an official core, or even for your version to be become > > preferred. > > Perception is the key word here. I can fork TiddlyWiki as of now, but > it wouldn't be The TiddlyWiki that everyone else uses; the one > anointed by Jeremy Ruston. > > What has hampered TiddlyWiki development is a need to remain backwards > compatible with a myriad of adaptors, plugins and tweaks which hijack, > eval and monkey-patch the core in unpredictable ways. > > I think most developers quickly find git preferable to svn, if only > because of being able to work offline, and stage changes, and provide > and manage patches in an almost entertaining way via github. > > Backwards compatibility and consensus are hard issues to tackle and > are orthogonal to github (v) svn/trac, though new tools with a clean > slate can only help progress. > > -- > Paul (psd)http://blog.whatfettle.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWikiDev" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywikidev?hl=en.
