Re: git-scm.com website

[David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>]

Shawn Pearce <spearce@spearce.org> writes:

> On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 9:06 AM, David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> wrote:
>> Shawn Pearce <spearce@spearce.org> writes:
>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 6:57 AM, Michael J Gruber
>>> <git@drmicha.warpmail.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Since we're talking business: git-scm.com still looks a bit like a
>>>> ProGit/Github promotion site. I don't have anything against either, and
>>>> git-scm.com provides a lot of the information that users are looking
>>>> for, and that are hard to find anywhere else; it's a landing page. It
>>>> just does not look like a "project home".
>>>
>>> Yes, git-scm.com is a place to point people.
>>
>> It features "Companies & Projects Using Git" at the bottom.  Not
>> "supporting" but "using".
>>
>> Linux is point 10 on that list.  The first 6 items are Google, facebook,
>> Microsoft, Twitter, LinkedIn, and Netflix.
>>
>> Even for an OpenSource project that does not buy into the Free Software
>> philosophy, that is a mostly embarrassing list of companies to advertise
>> for.
>>
>> Personally, I consider the recent migration of the Emacs repository to
>> Git a bigger endorsement but then that's me.
>>
>> It might make sense to reduce this list just to "Projects" since those
>> are actually more tangible and verifiable.  Or scrap it altogether.
>
> At the bottom of the git-scm.com page there is this blurb:
>
>   This open sourced site is hosted on GitHub.
>   Patches, suggestions and comments are welcome
>
> And that text contains a link to the GitHub repository[1] where anyone
> can propose modifications to the page. Unfortunately I don't know of
> anyone paying out contribution stipends for content changes made to
> git-scm.com.

Yeah, thanks for the cheap shot.  I already understood that category B
is subject to contempt.  Congrats on being category A or C.

> [1] https://github.com/git/git-scm.com/blob/master/README.md#contributing

Turns out that "anyone" is actually "anyone accepting the conditions for
a GitHub account":

    If you wish to contribute to this website, please fork it on GitHub,
    push your change to a named branch, then send a pull request.

I've read the rather longish Terms&Conditions of GitHub and found myself
unwilling to agree to them.  Which does not mean that changing the ways
of contributing to the Git website to accommodate me would make any
sense since obviously I don't have a clue what a member of the "Git
community" should be proud of and ashamed of and thus would be unable to
make a meaningful proposal anyway even if I were into website
programming.

-- 
David Kastrup