18 Sep
2017
18 Sep
'17
12:19 p.m.
The reason I suggest a public github project is that the tools are readily
available to manage individual developers making contributions.
I run a development group and we used subversion, which is a fine product
for tightly integrated teams. However, git has certain advantages for
distributed development teams (we switched a few years back). Github goes
a bit further in supporting independent developers working on an open
source project.
The workflow would work like this:
There is a master repository controlled by the project leader(s). Only
assigned contributors can update that repository. However, an independent
developer can fork the project and implement functionality on their own
copy. If the functionality proves useful and is well tested, then through
github they can submit a 'pull request' which allows the project leader(s)
to review the changes and merge them into the main project.
Here is a project's pull requests for an amateur radio project --
https://github.com/LX3JL/xlxd/pulls as an example.
On Sun, Sep 17, 2017 at 6:49 PM, Brian Kantor <Brian(a)ucsd.edu> wrote:
We have both 'git' and 'subversion'
repositories at work, and of the two,
I find subversion to be the one that is simpler and easier to install,
manage, and use. Both work well.
Incoming students and faculty seem to prefer git, while the folks who
have been with us for a while typically choose subversion.
I guess it's a matter of which nail you hit depends on the kind of hammer
you're used to.
- Brian
--
------------------------------
John D. Hays
K7VE
<http://k7ve.org/blog> <http://twitter.com/#!/john_hays>
<http://www.facebook.com/john.d.hays>