Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 14:00:18 -0600 > Dale <rdalek1...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Rich Freeman wrote: >>> On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 1:08 AM, Dale <rdalek1...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Then perhaps all this should have been worked out BEFORE switching >>>> to github? >>> We didn't switch to github. >> Then why are people saying to use git to look at the logs? I don't >> want to use git. > git != github... > >> I liked being able to go to the tree and look at the >> change logs when I needed to which is sometimes often. > I think you have a technology comprehension problem here, rather than a > technology problem. The problem is your workflow, not the tools. >
What I understand is this. The logs since github started being used are no longer updated like they used to be. I realize that git is a command but it seems that git gets its info from github since the logs are no longer downloaded when I sync the tree. It was really nice to be able to see those logs and be able to find out what changed especially if you want to hold off on a update that isn't important. Generally, the only way to know if it is important or not is to look at the logs and see why something is being changed. Also, I don't want to turn into Duncan and write a book to be sure that every specific detail is covered. I try to keep it short and basic. If the problem is me not understanding the problem then why are others complaining about the missing logs too? If it was just me then I would be the only one complaining about them being no longer updated. Obviously, it is not just me. Well, obvious to some but maybe not some others. We just want the logs back so we can see what is going on and for it to be easily available, preferably done with the sync like it used to be. The recent changes broke that and it needs to be fixed. Dale :-) :-)
