On 2011-11-07, at 04:54, Christian Stimming wrote: >> […] > > My suggestion is to move the main git repo also to a github one, and not > maintaining our own source code server. My reasons for this is an easier > administration of adding main commit access, and also a much easier handing > over of the administration priviledges itself - which is currently "hard > coded" to Derek as the root account owner on the gnucash box. > > If we decided to move not only to git, but also to github, we'd solve most of > the build script integration issues: github offers the additional feature of > accessing its git repos also by a svn client, see > https://github.com/blog/966-improved-subversion-client-support
Looks good: but if we use this setup, the main development branch in GitHub has to be called ‘master’, because that’s what GitHub expects to find when it’s looking for the branch to map to Subversion’s ‘trunk’ (see the last line of the blog post). Regards, Yawar
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
