On Sat, Jun 29, 2019 at 01:16:28PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
> The current presentation lists *branch formats* not *workflows*.
>
> Everything in the current page other than the comments and best
> practices columns is objective, but I see it as lower level than what
> I think you are looking for.
Whoops, indeed, you're totally right here.
> It would probably be useful for there to be a wiki page for each
> branch format which has a section for each kind of task ("modify an
> upstream file", "cherry pick a patch from upstream", "switch to new
> upstream version") etc. and describes all the different ways of
> achieving that taxk with that branch format.
>
> That would be "less raw" but perhaps is what you actually want ? :-)
Agreed.
> > I could suggest a descriptive wiki page for each style you identified,
> > that then the users of that workflow can add to, and can serve as seeds
> > for growing comprehensive documentation, if that is doable with the data
> > you collected.
>
> I can probably write a skeleton for most of these workflows. At
> least, for the most popular ones. In many cases a good starting point
> is probably a copy of a README.source from some package which actually
> mentions it, or of course the dgit workflow tutorial manpage.
>
> Maybe I should write one skeleton and then others can help ?
I'd say that seeding the wiki with pages for each branch formats could
both provide a link to details to take some load off the big table, and
create a space where the rest of the documentation can grow.
Enrico
--
GPG key: 4096R/634F4BD1E7AD5568 2009-05-08 Enrico Zini <enrico@enricozini.org>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature