GnuCash page Documentation Update Instructions has been changed by Sunfish62
sunfish62 at yahoo.com
Fri Jan 27 05:04:08 EST 2017
Thanks as always for providing a clear explanation of the situation. You have gently shown me where I have misunderstood the process, and make it clearer to me.
I have entered a version that I think does a reasonable job of promoting git-maint as the commonly-used mode, but also explaining when git-master might be used. I also included a reference to Git#Branches for the curious.
Chris, does that work for you? I hope so!
…Now on to the next areas…
P.S. Chris, you don’t need to apologize to me for being argumentative; I can be obnoxiously argumentative as well—for which I apologize as well.
> On Jan 27, 2017, at 2:06 PM, Geert Janssens <geert.gnucash at kobaltwit.be> wrote:
> Op vrijdag 27 januari 2017 11:09:10 CET schreef Chris Good & David T:
>> On another point, you commented on the page that I took
>> away information about committing to master. A few things on this: First,
>> for documentation, a non commit contributor is only going to be documenting
>> existing features, so they will ALWAYS be using maint. One of the wiki
>> pages for git states this; I was merely making this agree with that.
>> Second, the pages on git already go into this in more detail (which, by the
>> way, was why I suggested having one git wiki page earlier), so adding it
>> here only muddies the water. Third, you did precisely this with regard to
>> the user of xmllint/xsltproc and make. David
>> Non commit contributors are not the only ones to use this page.
>> Both Git and Git_For_Newbies say:
>> Bugfixes, translations, improvements of the documentation should
>> *usually* be applied on this branch.
> For sake of the discussion I will add the exact rule would be that you should
> document a feature on the same branch as it is available on in the gnucash
> repository, with maint taking priority over master if it's available on both.
> It's true that currently most new documentation is written for features that
> have already been released in a stable gnucash version (and hence are on the
> maint branch), so this documentation should go on the maint branch as well.
> However this is partly because the documentation is running behind so much and
> the current writers are still catching up (for which I'm immensely grateful!)
> There is a period in each development cycle where this is not so obvious. When
> we start releasing development snaphots - the next one being 2.7.0 somewhere
> later this year - documenters are invited to look at the new features that
> weren't previously released and write documentation for those. Similar to how
> translators mostly work on the maint branch, except during the prerelease
> period. Both are examples of when to create patches against the master branch.
> If you find a way to express this distinction concisely and clearly, I'd love
> to have this at least mentioned in some way indeed.
More information about the gnucash-devel