Re: separate git tree for docs

[John Mandereau]

On 2008/07/27 00:56 -0700, Graham Percival wrote:
> As an idea of the requirements: I currently anticipate 6 people
> (not currently listed as members of the devel team) who should
> have commit ability to Documentation/user/ after GDP.  1 of those
> people is also a translator, which may or may not be a different
> branch/tree/whatever.  Another 1 of those people should also have
> commit ability to the entire tree.

> I predict that at most two other people should be granted commit
> ability to Documentation/user/ in the next 12 months.

To make things clear enough (not for you Graham ;-), commit ability to a
particular directory foo/baz on a particular branch bar/blah is
determined by an agreement between developers and contributors, and not
by some permissions enforced in Git/SSH: people can be granted either no
or full access to all Git branches.


> Given this situation, I'm not at all certain that it's worth
> making a separate branch or cloned git tree for docs.  But I'll
> leave that decision to people who know more about git.

Checking and fixing docs compilation is always trivial or easy, so we
may expect people who edit docs to be able to keep master free of docs
compilation failure (or fix errors very quickly).  OTOH, changes in C++,
Scheme or makefiles can produce subtle build failures, which can't
always be fixed so quickly; this is one reason that motivated the
creation of lilypond/translation, and this could be a reason to create a
branch for docs in English.

I think it's not really worth creating a new branch for docs work: in
case we decide to backport docs changes from 2.13 to 2.12 for a few
months, we'll already have to play between stable/2.12 and master.  By
the way, I volunteer to do such backporting, if and only if somebody
else is ready to take over sometimes for a week or 2 when I'm getting
busy in real life (as I am these days).

Cheers,
John