Geert, Thanks as always for providing a clear explanation of the situation. You have gently shown me where I have misunderstood the process, and make it clearer to me.
I have entered a version that I think does a reasonable job of promoting git-maint as the commonly-used mode, but also explaining when git-master might be used. I also included a reference to Git#Branches for the curious. Chris, does that work for you? I hope so! …Now on to the next areas… David P.S. Chris, you don’t need to apologize to me for being argumentative; I can be obnoxiously argumentative as well—for which I apologize as well. > On Jan 27, 2017, at 2:06 PM, Geert Janssens <geert.gnuc...@kobaltwit.be> > wrote: > > Op vrijdag 27 januari 2017 11:09:10 CET schreef Chris Good & David T: >> On another point, you commented on the page that I took >> away information about committing to master. A few things on this: First, >> for documentation, a non commit contributor is only going to be documenting >> existing features, so they will ALWAYS be using maint. One of the wiki >> pages for git states this; I was merely making this agree with that. >> Second, the pages on git already go into this in more detail (which, by the >> way, was why I suggested having one git wiki page earlier), so adding it >> here only muddies the water. Third, you did precisely this with regard to >> the user of xmllint/xsltproc and make. David >> >> Non commit contributors are not the only ones to use this page. >> Both Git and Git_For_Newbies say: >> maint >> Bugfixes, translations, improvements of the documentation should >> *usually* be applied on this branch. > For sake of the discussion I will add the exact rule would be that you should > document a feature on the same branch as it is available on in the gnucash > repository, with maint taking priority over master if it's available on both. > > It's true that currently most new documentation is written for features that > have already been released in a stable gnucash version (and hence are on the > maint branch), so this documentation should go on the maint branch as well. > However this is partly because the documentation is running behind so much > and > the current writers are still catching up (for which I'm immensely grateful!) > > There is a period in each development cycle where this is not so obvious. > When > we start releasing development snaphots - the next one being 2.7.0 somewhere > later this year - documenters are invited to look at the new features that > weren't previously released and write documentation for those. Similar to how > translators mostly work on the maint branch, except during the prerelease > period. Both are examples of when to create patches against the master branch. > > If you find a way to express this distinction concisely and clearly, I'd love > to have this at least mentioned in some way indeed. > > Geert _______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel