|
SRFI development in the age of git
John Cowan
(12 Jul 2020 23:15 UTC)
|
|
Re: SRFI development in the age of git
Bradley Lucier
(12 Jul 2020 23:54 UTC)
|
|
Re: SRFI development in the age of git
Arthur A. Gleckler
(13 Jul 2020 00:31 UTC)
|
|
Re: SRFI development in the age of git
Arthur A. Gleckler
(13 Jul 2020 00:30 UTC)
|
|
Re: SRFI development in the age of git
Arthur A. Gleckler
(13 Jul 2020 01:35 UTC)
|
|
Re: SRFI development in the age of git
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(13 Jul 2020 06:45 UTC)
|
|
Re: SRFI development in the age of git
Linas Vepstas
(13 Jul 2020 07:05 UTC)
|
|
Re: SRFI development in the age of git
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(13 Jul 2020 07:09 UTC)
|
|
Re: SRFI development in the age of git
Linas Vepstas
(13 Jul 2020 07:34 UTC)
|
|
Re: SRFI development in the age of git
John Cowan
(13 Jul 2020 18:10 UTC)
|
|
Re: SRFI development in the age of git
Linas Vepstas
(13 Jul 2020 21:40 UTC)
|
|
Re: SRFI development in the age of git
John Cowan
(14 Jul 2020 00:38 UTC)
|
|
Re: SRFI development in the age of git
Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen
(14 Jul 2020 09:59 UTC)
|
|
Re: SRFI development in the age of git
Linas Vepstas
(14 Jul 2020 22:54 UTC)
|
|
Re: SRFI development in the age of git
John Cowan
(14 Jul 2020 23:12 UTC)
|
|
Re: SRFI development in the age of git
Linas Vepstas
(14 Jul 2020 23:57 UTC)
|
|
Re: SRFI development in the age of git
John Cowan
(15 Jul 2020 03:51 UTC)
|
|
Re: SRFI development in the age of git
Linas Vepstas
(15 Jul 2020 08:34 UTC)
|
|
Re: SRFI development in the age of git
Arthur A. Gleckler
(13 Jul 2020 07:40 UTC)
|
|
Re: SRFI development in the age of git Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen (13 Jul 2020 07:46 UTC)
|
|
Re: SRFI development in the age of git
Arthur A. Gleckler
(13 Jul 2020 15:59 UTC)
|
Am Mo., 13. Juli 2020 um 09:40 Uhr schrieb Arthur A. Gleckler <xxxxxx@speechcode.com>: > > On Sun, Jul 12, 2020 at 11:45 PM Marc Nieper-Wißkirchen <xxxxxx@nieper-wisskirchen.de> wrote: >> >> Couldn't all the author's and editor's draft happen in the central >> repository as well? Git has branches, so it is easy to have an >> author's branch. As everything will just have one history, it will >> make things easier for reviewers and testers. > > > That would require me to manage accounts and permissions for lots of people. Furthermore, I don't think Github has the fine-grained controls that I would need to be able to manage the master branch while giving authors and contributors free rein in other branches. Gitlab has that fine-grained control feature, I think. I understand that managing accounts and permissions will take some time, but maybe this can be delegated to someone else you trust?
