Sent from my mobile phone.
> On 8 Mar 2018, at 13:50, awokd <aw...@danwin1210.me> wrote: > > On Thu, March 8, 2018 1:16 pm, Alex Dubois wrote: > > I think the indentation got broken, this is you, right? Ouch yes might have been I had a problem with my mail client. > >>> True but if the content is not accepted in Qubes... you may still want >>> to have it in Qubes Community. >>> >>> An example is a page on setting up a vnc connection for remote admin to >>> dom0... some user would want that, also you break a big part of the >>> Qubes security. Qubes will not accept such a doc (I hope). It would >>> reside in the Qubes-community doc in a section “at your own risk”, with >>> a warning on the security risk and maybe a link to the PR discussion >>> with Qubes as to why it was rejected. Now Qubes 4.4 for example comes >>> along and they have a way to provide such service, we would be able to >>> PR in Qubes after modifications. >>> >>> >>> But I also see you point with a blank repo, it is clear and less prone >>> to mistakes. >>> >>> Not sure but personally I prefer to just work on the fork. It will be >>> more often useful and less copy pasting when submitting PR from one >>> repo to the other (ie multiple pages updates in one PR) >>> >>> For new docs, it has the advantage to also implicitly help selecting >>> the right place to host the info. >>> >>> The empty one will either be a mess or will have to be organised as >>> well (with the additional burden that it also has to be aware of >>> Qubes-doc) >>> >>> >>> You can fork Qubes-community/Qubes-doc and do whatever you want (and >>> others can access it (and know you forked) also not the reason so you >>> could have a link to your fork in a in-progress section of Qubes >>> community) >>> >>> I am naturally fairly organised and have experience of very large >>> projects where I left sometimes too much flexibility and ended up with >>> a mess 3 years later. So this is why I’m not keen on blank areas. But >>> this is a community project, so I am also very interested in the human >>> interaction factor and respectful of others opinions. >>> >>> If I have not convinced you and awokd, I don’t see a big problem in >>> having both. > > Yes, that's part of that "magic" step I wasn't sure how to address. I'll > defer to your experience on it. My hope is the wiki will make it easy for > people to contribute too without worrying about PRs and all that, but I'm > not sure how much admin overhead's going to be involved. > I don’t have much experience with GitHub, a bit more with git. True the wiki may address it. The best is probably to test it. I am snowed under at work at the moment. So maybe test between you on one of your existing projects and then we can discuss. -- 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/2D1D604A-E974-455D-9B42-ADEC79AB9A90%40gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
