[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [gnugo-devel] Membership request for group GNU Go
From: |
Thien-Thi Nguyen |
Subject: |
Re: [gnugo-devel] Membership request for group GNU Go |
Date: |
Tue, 30 Aug 2022 23:23:35 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) |
NB: To and Reply-To set to gnugo-devel m.l; Cc trimmed.
() bump-math@sporadic.stanford.edu (Daniel Bump (bump@math.stanford.edu email))
() Fri, 26 Aug 2022 06:44:28 -0700
> I hope that by including gnugo-devel in the discussion, we
> can get more perspectives and that the GNU Go maintainers
> can be convinced to change their position to that of "do
> not keep generated files under version control", on the way
> to eventually approving a merge of that branch and future
> development along those lines.
I think I was the one that was arguing for this position
(mainly so that someone could build gnugo more easily after
downloading from savannah versus a tarball), and since Gunnar
was not in agreement, I would not insist on the point.
That's great news. Thanks for reconsidering! I would like to
propose the next steps for us to take, collectively:
- create top-level file HACKING, includes info on
- branch discipline (e.g., push to ‘master’ vs dev br & merge)
- how to bootstrap (run autogen.sh, etc)
- how to make a release
- copyright discipline (e.g., once per year vs only on change)
- coding conventions (whitespace, indentation, etc)
- other developer-only info/lore
- etc
- merge branch ‘ttn-maint’ (and delete afterwards)
- gather / apply other fixes found in the wild
- make a test maintenance release (published on alpha.gnu.org)
(info "(maintain) Test Releases") and solicit timely feedback
- tweak as necessary / work out the kinks
- make a "real" maintenance release
I'm not a maintainer, but i can take a crack at writing HACKING
(adapting the GNU RCS HACKING[1], basically, w/ input from
everyone), and help out w/ the other stuff. It's been many
years since the last GNU Go release, so there's no rush (IMHO),
but i think it would be reasonable to aim for "real" release by
end of year.
What do the maintainers think? Is this something you'd approve?
I don't want to step on anyone's toes!
[1] http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/rcs.git/tree/HACKING?h=p
--
Thien-Thi Nguyen -----------------------------------------------
(defun responsep (query) ; (2022) Software Libero
(pcase (context query) ; = Dissenso Etico
(`(technical ,ml) (correctp ml))
...)) 748E A0E8 1CB8 A748 9BFA
--------------------------------------- 6CE4 6703 2224 4C80 7502
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature