From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: Git Community Book Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 11:42:30 -0700 Message-ID: <7vwsj4edm1.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <20080729170955.GK32184@machine.or.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "Petr Baudis" , "git list" To: "Scott Chacon" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jul 29 20:43:38 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KNuAa-0007sy-5D for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 29 Jul 2008 20:43:36 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757213AbYG2Smi (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Jul 2008 14:42:38 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757160AbYG2Smh (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Jul 2008 14:42:37 -0400 Received: from a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([207.106.133.19]:42496 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757077AbYG2Smh (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Jul 2008 14:42:37 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB2564A494; Tue, 29 Jul 2008 14:42:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-211.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3861C4A492; Tue, 29 Jul 2008 14:42:32 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Scott Chacon's message of "Tue, 29 Jul 2008 11:30:55 -0700") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 1CBF62DC-5D9E-11DD-9E8F-CE28B26B55AE-77302942!a-sasl-fastnet.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: "Scott Chacon" writes: >> >> There is no license in the source code - what are the copying terms? >> > > I copied in the COPYING file from Git - GPL2. > >> It is maybe somewhat unfortunate that this is in a different format that >> the standard git choice asciidoc, but the formats do look rather similar >> so I assume it should not be hard to even convert from one to another if >> needed. > > I simply didn't want to get asciidoc working locally - it's always > been a bit of a pain to compile (I've heard it referred to more than > once as the only 'nightmare dependancy' in git), and I don't need to > make man pages or anything, so it seemed Markdown would be a better > choice for my output targets. There are a number of good Markdown > interpreters and they're easy to get running. I personally like markdown, but doesn't your refusal to work with existing practices pose a significant problem, unless: (0) you do not consider it a goal to keep the documentation shipped with git and your book in sync; or (1) you have either markdown to asciidoc (or the other way around) converter; the book is written in markdown, and its conversion back to asciidoc is fed to Documentation as patches (or the other way around); or (2) somebody tries to find markdown to manpage, and we convert Documentation/ to markdown. Or is this, "fork once and borrow reviewer's time, but never be able to contribute back to the original text because the result is so different" approach?