3 ms·

I very much appreciate their use of the word 'clone' instead of 'fork', and the focus on maintaining the idea of canonical repository and project: User clone

I very much appreciate their use of the word 'clone' instead of 'fork', and the focus on maintaining the idea of canonical repository and project: User clones aren't forks, in the traditional sense, where a fork has little intention to contribute back to the original project. Rather, the entire purpose of a user clone is to allow users to contribute to projects without requiring official commit access permissions. I was thinking of migrating some projects to github for this feature, but instead I think I'll just switch to Mercurial on Google Code.

davidw 17y ago
Yes, this is a really important point. A lot of the "OMG git is so cool" early adopters seemed to go off on how great forking things is without making this critical distinction between a 'code' fork' and a 'project' fork. The first is simply a technical thing - the latter is a human thing. Indiscriminately creating random project forks without contributing back is "bad open source citizenship".