Hi Russel,
Forgive me for butting in on a conversation but . . .
Anytime :)
Isn't this whole Subversion centralism problem solved by using a DVCS
such as Bazaar, or Git -- and soon, I gather, Mercurial.
Yes, kind of - I've only recently come across Git and the concept of DVCS
but it was my intention to look at using a DVCS for this.
But DVCS "only" does source code - setting up a seperate branch only works
if the community at large see the new branch, whereas the Commons group are
considering marking Jelly as "No Longer Maintained" and moving the
repository out of the main branch.
From my point of view, I would only want to perform a public branch with the
endorsment of the Commons team; IMHO it's important for new and existing
users to see a future for the project, and for there to be a link from the
official Commons website to the federated Jelly site. The original
downloads would remain for backward compatability, but the Commons site
would clearly refer users onto the new site for upgrades and future
development.
John
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
