3 ms·
> Having Tickets, the Wiki and technotes in the same place is an interesting idea, Couldn't you just have a `bugs`, and `notes` branch? gugs would be a folder
by jimktrains2 11y ago
> Having Tickets, the Wiki and technotes in the same place is an interesting idea,
Couldn't you just have a `bugs`, and `notes` branch? gugs would be a folder per bug, with each message being a MIME or some similar message format. notes would be a collection of md, rst, textile, &c similar to how github already has a gh-pages branch. It wouldn't need to be part of the scm, but simply be convention.
- feld 11y agoThis sounds horrible. Why would you think this is something people should be subjected to? The polar opposite of user friendly.
- w_t_payne 11y agoThe user interface is a separate concern from the serialisation format.
- jimktrains2 11y ago1) I never even mentioned a UI or how the user would interact with what I proposed. 2) Even if you just edited files with a text editor, how is that not user friendly? It's about as friendly as it could possibly be.
- WorldMaker 11y agoThe benefit to having it in the same branch/associated with a specific branch of code is that it makes it easier to have those issues and notes represent the current state of that branch and as you merge branches for that information to similar flow across the merges just as with the associated code. For example, say you fix a bug in a specific branch. If the issue is being tracked inside that branch you can mark it as fixed in that branch, and then checking if an issue is fixed in a given branch is a matter of checking the issue state for that branch. As you merge that code change to other branches, the flag that the issue has been fixed presumably flows with the merge as well and you have an easier time of telling the particular state of any given branch.