GnuPG Github mirrors

[Joshua Rogers]

On 29/10/15 05:58, RB wrote:
> Write it up if you wish, but GnuPG follows the same development
> process that existed for a large plurality of FOSS software prior to
> Github.  These models work, and have for literally decades before
> Github even existed; the only difference is the SCM has changed.
Right. Exactly.
However, from what I've seen, new developers are being taught that
places such as Github are the only way to develop and distribute code.
Hell, I've seen people think that 'git' was just short for Github.
Perhaps the point of this whole thread is an example of what I'm talking
about.

By documenting how things are done in certain projects, it 1. allows
them to expand their knowledge, and 2., allows them to in the future
possibly contribute code appropriately.

> It's amusing and frustrating to see a wave of developers insisting
> that any workflow but github must be backwards or nonexistent.
> Emailed patchsets and communication prior to submission are a useful
> workflow, especially for tools that must necessarily be conservative
> in their development.

I don't understand what you mean here.
Maybe I'm too tired and am missing something, but I would think that
you're in agreement that mailing list submissions are good? Apologies if
I'm misinterpreting it.



I think I've said everything I need to regarding my views on this
matter, so I won't delve into it anymore.

Thanks,
-- 
-- Joshua Rogers <https://internot.info/>

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: </pipermail/attachments/20151029/afaa8ec0/attachment.sig>