On Wednesday, March 7, 2018 at 1:37:06 PM UTC+1, awokd wrote: > On Wed, March 7, 2018 11:48 am, Yuraeitha wrote: > > On Wednesday, March 7, 2018 at 12:17:09 PM UTC+1, awokd wrote: > > > >> On Wed, March 7, 2018 11:06 am, Yuraeitha wrote: > >> > >> > >>> Let me know if I misunderstood you. I'm still grasping the proper > >>> terminology, as well the limits and possibilities of Github, so it > >>> might be easy to misunderstand. > >> > >> Github is easy for me to misunderstand too. :) > >> > >> > >> You had 2 community repos in addition to the official Qubes repo. I'm > >> suggesting only 1 community repo with the following settings, and not > >> touching the official repo at all. I don't know how to address > >> migrating content, so I'm not sure it's a possibility. > >> > >>>> - one Github site > >>>> - only a single owner permitted > >>>> - Wiki with editing permitted to any logged in Github user (your > >>>> scratch/development area) - collaborators by individual Github name > >>>> appear to have push/write access to full repo - Code section could > >>>> contain the more formal contents, would have to be a collaborator to > >>>> contribute directly or approve submissions - unclear on how > >>>> documents would migrate from here to qubes-doc unless as a > >>>> copy/paste, but that would lose attribution and I imagine most would > >>>> like their own name on their commit! > >>>> > > > > Using this guide as a common ground > > https://help.github.com/articles/about-pull-requests/ > > > > > > Pull requests could serve as a trial and testing grounds on a volunteer > > repository? Maybe this is what you meant all along and I misunderstood. > > But that does indeed make it much more simple. > > Yes, one community repo with both a wiki and code section. Everyone with a > Github account could edit the community wiki to collaborate on documents. > Once it's roughly finished, the doc. owner could submit to the (same) > community code repo with a PR (which would require the repo owner or one > of the Collaborators to approve, IIUC). From there, magic would happen and > it would somehow get submitted to the official qubes-doc repo.
It seems like a good way to do it, I like it. What does others think about it? It might be a good idea to have some finished thoughts / discussions ready for Andrew, it'd be inhuman to expect him to read everything (it's a lot to read). Does anyone disagree with the idea of making an initial first step with a second repository with an associated Community doc page, as discussed? We can always look at forums and other platforms later on, it's probably best not to do everything at once, especially now when the Qubes staff is busy, it might be best to start where the least work is needed from the Qubes staff. A second repository and assigning volunteer moderator(s) should be straight forward less than 5 minutes task (This is assuming this is also approved by the Qubes staff of course). -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "qubes-users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to qubes-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to qubes-users@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/qubes-users/cbd1f82c-c611-45a1-836f-03259b3370ac%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
