dsource.org moved

[Vladimir Panteleev via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Monday, 20 April 2015 at 23:27:58 UTC, Stewart Gordon wrote:
> On 21/04/2015 00:19, Stewart Gordon wrote:
> <snip>
>> ?? When I worked on the project on dsource, until it stopped 
>> working recently I generally
>> had no trouble just committing my updates using SVN.  I didn't 
>> have to create patches at
>> all.  As I understood it, neither did anybody else who helped 
>> out (after all, it wasn't
>> _my_ dsource project).
>
> OK, so come to think about it, maybe those who were 
> collaborating were given commit access on dsource as and when.

I believe this is the case. That, or they simply didn't have SVN 
installed. They sent a PR to my GitHub mirror instead.

> In the other thread I referred to this
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5010754/github-collaborators-have-commit-access
> which makes it sound as though it's possible to do the same 
> thing in GitHub.  Is that page wrong?

This question pertains to private GitHub repositories (a feature 
of paid plans).

Regardless, I do not recommend attempting to shoehorn your 
previous SVN workflow into git and GitHub. The usual way 
contributions are done with GitHub is that anyone with a GitHub 
account can create a pull request (a series of commits, initially 
published on their own fork of the repository), which the 
repository owner (or collaborators) can then accept (merge) into 
the main repository. Instead of designating a group of committers 
as in SVN, you would simply need to review pull requests and 
click the "merge" button to accept them. If you do not foresee 
yourself being available often enough to review/accept pull 
requests, you can designate a few collaborators who can do it as 
well.