On Sun, 17 Nov 2013 at 11:45:23 +0100, "Rodolfo García Peñas (kix)" wrote: > On 17/11/2013 9:37, Carlos R. Mafra wrote: > > On Sat, 16 Nov 2013 at 23:39:18 +0100, Rodolfo García Peñas wrote: > >> On Thu, 14 Nov 2013, Carlos R. Mafra escribió: > >> > >>> I created a wmaker repository in github, > >>> > >>> https://github.com/crmafra/wmaker > >>> > >>> I will keep both the "old" repo.or.cz and the new github updated. > >>> > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> I am testing it. I sent some patches. > > > > Please send the patches to the mailing list. > > But, If I sent the patches to the mail list, nothing changes.
What do you mean by nothing changes? When you send the patch to the mailing list many more people see it and are able to comment on it just by replying a plain text email (that's why the patches must be in the body of the email). That's the purpose of a development mailing list! > > I thought the idea with github was to have a bug tracking > > system, not that one could make the visibility of patches lower. > > If github is only a BTS, we don't use the code review Code review is easy to do over email, that's how things have always worked with many open source projects. I think having the repo in github is a good idea only because John never set up a BTS in www.windowmaker.org. > nor have our repos for other ideas. Why not? Everybody here in the mailing list have their own repos already in their own machines, that's the nature of distributed development. They develop their own ideas and then send patches, and most of this happens in the privacy of their own machines. _If_ they want to have their ideas in the open, they can have their own repos in github or anywhere else. But that is independent of whether the main wmaker repo is in github or not. So this argument does not make sense to me. Furthermore, I noticed in your patches that I'd like to fix some typos in the commit logs and to include the WPrefs: prefix in the patch that touches only WPrefs. That will make your repository no longer be in sync with mine after I do that. For that reason I would think that developing in your own temporary branches (that are later discarded) is more efficient, but everybody has their own workflows and it's ultimately their decision. But again, that is independent of whether the main wmaker is in github or not. > > > Patches belong to the mailing list for everybody to see. -- To unsubscribe, send mail to [email protected].
