Re: PATCH: document git in Etc/zsh-development-guide

[Bart Schaefer <schaefer@brasslantern.com>]

On Dec 20,  2:38pm, Oliver Kiddle wrote:
}
} Phil Pennock wrote:
} > We also now have *two* git workflow sections, contradicting each other.
} 
} We already had two contractory workflows and that, more so than the
} sections, is what needs resolving. Unfortunately it is harder to
} consolidate two contradictory workflows than to take one as a baseline
} and discuss how it can be improved or where the interpretation of the
} consensus from earlier discussion was wrong.

See, this is exactly what I was hoping would NOT happen when I suggested
that someone [*] summarize to the mailing list and everyone agree on the
summary before we started committing changes to the development guide.
I suppose one of the arguments for changing to git is that it makes this
kind of thing easier to sort out, because commits can be shared/reviewed
before being pushed to the master repository.

Thank goodness PWS tagged CVS when the -test1 tarball was created.  I'm
half tempted to cvs-admin-o back to that revision so we can start over.

[*] By which I imply someone who understands git thoroughly enough to
comprehend/consolidate everything that was being suggested, for which
I am not qualified.

Incidentally, the IP address of zsh.cvs.sourceforge.net appears to have
changed recently.  Maybe whatever it was Phil meant about SourceForge
having broken CVS, has been corrected now?  (Not that this changes any
plans.)