On 1/26/16 10:55 AM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Sat, 2015-12-19 at 14:51 -0600, Doug Goldstein wrote:
>> All,
>>
>> Now I'll start off by saying that "no" is a perfectly acceptable answer
>> to this suggestion. Basically I remember at the Xen Developer Summit a
>> few people mentioned it being nice if people provided a git tree where
>> their branches were available for testing. I was just thinking it might
>> be easier for third parties to do that if there was an official Xen
>> Project mirror of the main repos on xenbits on GitHub and people could
>> fork that repo and make their branch available. Just a thought.
> 
> If forking the repo significantly easier than just creating an empty one of
> your own and pushing to it? Is the parent repo "important" in some way in
> the GH world? (Given that, as George says, we are unlikely to accept
> contributions via GH pull requests etc).
> 
> Ian.
> 

Its not easier or different. I just remembered from the Xen Developer
Summit that a few people complained that a lot of the patch series
posted to the ML really should be available as a repo because they were
quite large and hard to review. I see this comment come up over and over
on the ML myself as well so I was just trying to lower the barriers to
people doing that. I know the reason people don't isn't technical so
this isn't really a technical solution but I figured this is more a
social thing. GitHub has the ability to mark a repo as a mirror and not
allow pull requests or issues, which is what I would recommend. I'm just
looking at improving the community aspect. I could create an
organization called "xen-mirror" and get it setup and turn it over to
the Xen Project.

Again, I'm fine with an answer of "no" here. Just trying to pitch out
ideas to solve what some see as an irritation.

-- 
Doug Goldstein