On 2012/7/15 21:21, Thomas Martitz wrote:
Am 15.07.2012 14:26, schrieb Frank Lanitz:
On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 19:01:53 +0800
Hong Xu <d...@hong.me> wrote:
On 07/15/2012 03:40 PM, Frank Lanitz wrote:
On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 09:27:46 +0800
Hong Xu <d...@hong.me> wrote:
And, BTW, why geany-plugins project doesn't use a submodule for
each plugin? Not all people need to clone the whole repository,
and as it is separated to submodules, the permission control can
be better for developers.
IIRc this was under discussion in past but was dismissed due to
adding complexity and little overall understanding of this.
However, I don't think cloning the repository is this much traffic.
Also a goal was to have plugins and its patches being reviewed
before entering master to enforce a minimum on quality. This also
includes some fire-and-forget-plugins of some developers as you can
see from MAINTAINERS files there are a lot of plugins out of
maintenance.
Thanks. However, I have to make a pull request for any trivial
changes in this way. Do you think this is unnecessary?
We are still in finding a good flow on this as I agree its not optimal.
Most of the time changes are not actually trivial. Also multiple small
and trivial changes can be submitted as a single pull request.
Anyway this is the linux kernel dev model and it works good (for some
projects) even if tiny changes need to go through the chain as well.
OK, that should be fine.
Hong
_______________________________________________
Geany-devel mailing list
Geany-devel@uvena.de
https://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany-devel
