Re: Separate git branch for documentation

[Patrick McCarty]

On Mon, Aug 18, 2008 at 6:37 PM, Han-Wen Nienhuys <address@hidden> wrote:
> If we start adding a lot of (occasional) contributors, I propose we
> use the git.or.cz fork mechanism.  People can then publish their
> changes, and it's easy for the maintainers to pull/cherry-pick thoses.

I believe Graham was just talking about adding myself and Jonathan, if
I remember correctly.

I set up a fork on repo.or.cz just now, but I don't know if it will
fit my work flow very well.

Currently, I do all of my docs work on a separate local branch which I
rebase to the current master whenever I have a patch ready.  Usually,
I send time-critical patches to lily-devel and my docs work to Neil
(used to be Graham), but only after recompiling the docs.

If I do my work at repo.or.cz, I don't think I'll be able to rebase,
since people might pull from my repository.  This would mess with Git
history, potentially.  Cherry-picking would work fine, but I intend on
sending more frequent docs updates, so cherry-picking multiple commits
from repo.or.cz might get cumbersome for the existing team.

Of course, it is not my decision, and I don't know which solution
would be easiest, but I felt that I needed to speak up.

Thanks,
Patrick