On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 5:37 PM, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > Shawn Pearce <spea...@spearce.org> writes: > >> On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 9:06 AM, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: >>> Shawn Pearce <spea...@spearce.org> writes: >>> >>>> On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 6:57 AM, Michael J Gruber >>>> <g...@drmicha.warpmail.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Since we're talking business: git-scm.com still looks a bit like a >>>>> ProGit/Github promotion site. I don't have anything against either, and >>>>> git-scm.com provides a lot of the information that users are looking >>>>> for, and that are hard to find anywhere else; it's a landing page. It >>>>> just does not look like a "project home". >>>> >>>> Yes, git-scm.com is a place to point people. >>> >>> It features "Companies & Projects Using Git" at the bottom. Not >>> "supporting" but "using". >>> >>> Linux is point 10 on that list. The first 6 items are Google, facebook, >>> Microsoft, Twitter, LinkedIn, and Netflix. >>> >>> Even for an OpenSource project that does not buy into the Free Software >>> philosophy, that is a mostly embarrassing list of companies to advertise >>> for. >>> >>> Personally, I consider the recent migration of the Emacs repository to >>> Git a bigger endorsement but then that's me. >>> >>> It might make sense to reduce this list just to "Projects" since those >>> are actually more tangible and verifiable. Or scrap it altogether. >> >> At the bottom of the git-scm.com page there is this blurb: >> >> This open sourced site is hosted on GitHub. >> Patches, suggestions and comments are welcome >> >> And that text contains a link to the GitHub repository[1] where anyone >> can propose modifications to the page. Unfortunately I don't know of >> anyone paying out contribution stipends for content changes made to >> git-scm.com. > > Yeah, thanks for the cheap shot. I already understood that category B > is subject to contempt. Congrats on being category A or C. > >> [1] https://github.com/git/git-scm.com/blob/master/README.md#contributing > > Turns out that "anyone" is actually "anyone accepting the conditions for > a GitHub account": > > If you wish to contribute to this website, please fork it on GitHub, > push your change to a named branch, then send a pull request. > > I've read the rather longish Terms&Conditions of GitHub and found myself > unwilling to agree to them. Which does not mean that changing the ways > of contributing to the Git website to accommodate me would make any > sense since obviously I don't have a clue what a member of the "Git > community" should be proud of and ashamed of and thus would be unable to > make a meaningful proposal anyway even if I were into website > programming.
A few other points about git-scm.com: * as Michael says it "still looks a bit like a ProGit/Github promotion site" * some of the pull request can be rejected even if the developers want them, like this pull request to add back a list of contributors was: https://github.com/git/git-scm.com/pull/216 (By the way this pull request talks about bugs in https://github.com/git/git/graphs/contributors that are still not fixed...) It is kind of strange to say that we should contribute to a web site that promotes ProGit and GitHub a lot and where our contributions can be rejected because it is not maintained by us. -- 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
