[CM] CL-CLM on github?

[David Lindes]

Hi Bill et al,

[Note: sorry I was quiet for a couple weeks there...  Life is
unpredictable, for me, lately.]

[tl;dr version: Is there some reason for me *not* to act autonomously and
put things on github?]


Hmm, OK.  I guess you got a bunch of "no git" (or "no github") votes
privately, or I misunderstood something, because all the "votes" I saw
on-list seemed in favor.  ;)

So, I'm curious, then -- having seen a bunch of public in-favor votes, I
guess a few questions:

(1) Is there something in particular I would benefit from being aware of
that's a reason not to have things on github?

(2) Is there some way I could get (even read-only) access to whatever SCM
is in play now, instead of just dealing with the tarball as a master source?

(3) Is there any objection to me putting my own version up on github?  If
so, what's the objection?

I fully understand if Bill doesn't want to put in extra work to support
something he won't use; if that's the only issue, that's fine, I'll just
put something up on github for myself, and if others want to use it, great;
and if not, no worries.

If there's something else, though, I'd like to know about it.

And for what it's worth:

My reasons for wanting something other than the status quo (only some of
which have anything to do with git or github) are several:

(a) I'd prefer to have a local tree that's based on some sort of SCM,
rather than having to maintain versions against a whole-repository
distribution.

(b) For my own personal use, I've taken to really liking git, and so even
if point (a) above was solved with an SVN (or darcs or hg or whatever)
link, I'd most likely end up making a git clone of it to actually work from.

(c) I find that git, in general, and github, in particular, provide some
great tools for increasing the degree of collaboration on things.  Granted,
my guess (being totally new to this list and this project) is that Bill is
quite responsive to changes, and that this is likely perceived as largely a
non-issue.

(d) One of my motivations for making changes at all is to get things into
quicklisp[0], and having something in github is convenient for that --
though not required.

Anyway, I guess my main questions are (2) and (3) above.

Input appreciated.

Thanks,

- David

P.S.  One final thing: I meant to reply to john saylor's message and add my
favorite resource for those not yet on-board with git: "Understanding Git
Conceptually" -- it changed my mind about whether and why to use git, and
if nothing else, it gives some information on what git is all about, so you
can draw your own conclusions (for those who haven't already, or are open
to re-exploring it): http://www.eecs.harvard.edu/~cduan/technical/git/


[0] See http://www.quicklisp.org/ -- and also
https://github.com/quicklisp/quicklisp-projects/issues/290 -- the latter I
intend to work on, probably right after I send this e-mail (again, life is
unpredictable for me right now).

On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Bill Schottstaedt <bil at ccrma.stanford.edu>wrote:

> my informal vote tally, here and via email, is that nearly everyone
> likes it the way it is now, so I won't make any changes.   But, as
> always, if anyone sends me improvements, I'll merge them into
> my copy with glee!
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cmdist mailing list
> Cmdist at ccrma.stanford.edu
> http://ccrma-mail.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/cmdist
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://ccrma-mail.stanford.edu/pipermail/cmdist/attachments/20120416/84bc564b/attachment.html