On 01/15/18 at 12:56am, Eli Schwartz via arch-projects wrote:
On 01/15/2018 12:07 AM, Luke Shumaker wrote:
From what I see, that's a minority position, but of course I run in FSF circles, so my perception is a bit skewed. :P
If that's the official position that the archweb team wants to take, I won't argue.
I dunno what jelle/angvp/the gang would say, I do know that my personal opinion is markedly skewed. :p
I don't think we care largely care/cared. But this is probably something we should resolve. <huge snip>
I'll be watching this list and the Pull Requests page on archweb's github with anticipation. ;)
Wait, archweb is on GitHub? :P
Is a GitHub PR the preferred method, or is the usual git-send-email to this ML preferred?
(Though I have to be honest: this is on my TODO list, but fairly low priority on it)
Arch Linux has a Github organization: https://github.com/archlinux
A few things are mirrored there, and a couple new projects have their primary home there. Archweb specifically is primarily developed there via pull requests. Unlike other Arch projects, it is the preferred workflow of archweb developers/contributors. Though I am sure git-send-email to this ML will still get through. :)
Yeah PR's are preferred, they get tested automatically too. I'll respond on the other mail about the violating files :) -- Jelle van der Waa