On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 1:26 PM, Hadley Wickham <h.wick...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Maybe I'm missing something, but why would you fork the repo instead of
> > just using the existing repo?
>
> One advantage of a fork is that you have permanent archive even if the
> original goes away.
>
Exactly. Even if the original repo is on GitHub, I want to use one under
github.com/cran. Actually, I don't even want to fork the original repo,
because I want the github.com/cran repos to look the same: one commit per
package version, tagged with the version number. This way it is easy to
compare different versions of a package, easy to link to the code of a
specific version, etc.
If I link to the original repo, then I need the maintainer to tag releases
properly, etc. Many of them do, but still, I don't want to rely on that.
I obviously want to send potential contributors to the original upstream
repo, and I think I can do a better job at that, with warnings both on the
web page and in the github.com/cran repos. E.g. on the web page, we can
have a "Contribute" button, that goes upstream. On the cran GH page I can
have a warning line on top, with the link to the original repo.
Gabor
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
______________________________________________
R-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
