I just launched my first public repository for a webapp. I'm looking for maximum ease of contribution from as large a number of users as possible. User contributions may be as isolated as one or two web-commits per user.
The single github repo that I have so far I thought to use as a pristine, vetted core repository, meaning that I want to retain full control over the repository and preferrably avoid adding any direct collaborators. I considered creating a "dirty" fork, where I could add collaborators at the asking, and they could make whatever changes they wished, from which I would pull to incorporate into the "core" repository, but github doesn't allow the same user to fork one of their own repositories. If I don't create a "dirty" fork, I could just tell potential contributors to: A. Simply add a comment on a file that you think needs changes, with whatever level of detail you see fit. or if they're looking for more dedicated collaboration: B. Fork the repository with their own account on github. Am I missing some simpler way to make contribution from collaborators efficient? Should I not worry about potential inefficiency of completely forking the whole repository and just tell any collaborator to fork the repo and hack away, then make me a pull request? Is there an acceptable way to set up the "clean" and "dirty" collaborative versions of the same repo that I described? What's the best workflow for github version control approaching a 1-to-1 commit-to-user ratio? --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GitHub" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/github?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
