dsource.org moved

[Stewart Gordon via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On 21/04/2015 00:35, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
<snip>
>> 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).

One of the comments there: "Or you make your repository public, then everyone (who is not 
a collaborator) has read-only access"

And everyone who _is_ a collaborator has what?

> 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.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fork_%28software_development%29
implies that a fork is a divergent development branch - a separate copy of the project 
that has no ongoing link to the original.  Is the Git concept of a fork different?

> 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.

Maybe I'll do that.  Most of the time I should be available enough, but there's always the 
chance that I'll be away for a week every now and again (possibly longer if I'm lucky).

Stewart.

-- 
My email address is valid but not my primary mailbox and not checked regularly.  Please 
keep replies on the 'group where everybody may benefit.