On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 6:13 AM, Michael Haggerty <mhag...@alum.mit.edu> wrote: > > But my main point is that I think it would be easier to phase out > contrib/ if there were a good alternate way of providing visibility to > "satellite" projects. The relevant Git wiki page [1] is the most likely > candidate, but it is a bit overwhelming due to its size, it has fallen > into disuse because it was broken for such a long time, and it is not > prominently linked to from git-scm.com. If it were curated a bit, it > would help users find the best ancillary tools quickly. Perhaps ranking > the tools based on the results of the Git user surveys would help bring > the most popular to the top of each category. >
One idea here could be to mirror what the libgit2 project [1] (and many others) are doing on GitHub. Use the organization unit [2] as an umbrella for the contrib projects. If necessary, put a pretty web-page on top [3]. Of course you don't have to tie it to GitHub, but they do have some nice mechanisms for showing off popularity (stars and forks). I heard that clojure/contrib [4] went through a big clean-up recently, although I'm not sure if there was an equivalent reasoning behind it. But their guide-lines on what should go into contrib may have some good ideas [5]. [1] https://github.com/libgit2 [2] https://github.com/git [3] http://libgit2.github.com/ [4] http://dev.clojure.org/display/design/Where+Did+Clojure.Contrib+Go [5] http://dev.clojure.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=5767464 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
